Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Creation and implementation of a comprehensive active shooter/safety plan: a promising practice study
(USC Thesis Other)
Creation and implementation of a comprehensive active shooter/safety plan: a promising practice study
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: SAFETY PLAN
1
Creation and Implementation of a Comprehensive Active Shooter/Safety Plan: A Promising
Practice Study
By
Crystal Berrellez
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2018
Copyright 2018 Crystal Berrellez
Active Shooter
2
DEDICATION
This project is dedicated to my mother, who is my inspiration. I could not have
completed this journey without her unwavering support and loving nature. She is the reason I
have come this far, and I dedicate this project to her. It is from her that I learned to have a loving
sprit and a kind demeanor and to work hard toward my goals. It is because of her that I have
been able to achieve my dreams, and for this I am forever thankful. I owe my life to my mother,
and there aren’t enough words to express my deep appreciation for her. Thank you, Mom, for
always being there to guide me, love me, and support me throughout this amazing journey.
Active Shooter
3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my dissertation chair, Dr. Kathy Stowe, for supporting me
throughout this journey. I want to thank you for always motivating me to push forward, to never
give up, and to always strive to do my very best. I would also like to thank my dissertation
committee members: Dr. Artneth Samkian and Dr. Lawrence Picus. Dr. Samkian, as one of my
first professors in the OCL program, your kind and supportive nature is what encouraged me to
continue on this journey. You truly helped me understand the role of a researcher and how I can
utilize research to make the world a better place. Dr. Picus, thank you for the knowledge you
bestowed upon me in relation to clearly defining the purpose of my study and what I would like
others to learn from it.
I would like to thank my professional advisors, Dr. Samuel Buenrostro, Captain Russell
Shubert, and Detective Michael Bucy, for assisting me throughout my writing process and for
providing me with a plethora of knowledge in relation to school safety. Their knowledge and
expertise assisted with highlighting the importance of my study and the need for all students to
be provided a safe and secure learning environment.
Dr. Buenrostro, I want to thank you for all of your help throughout this study and for not
only supporting me throughout this process, but also throughout my childhood and journey into
adulthood. You have always been there as my mentor to guide me in all aspects of my life, and
for this I am truly grateful. I respect and admire you immensely, and I aspire to be like you
someday. Thank you for helping me grow into the person I am today.
Captain Russell Shubert, I want to thank you for always being there to answer any and all
questions related to my study, as well as for assisting me with my analysis on school safety.
Active Shooter
4
Your expertise is forever appreciated, and you were instrumental in developing and completing
this study. I feel honored to have been provided the opportunity to work side by side with you.
Detective Michael Bucy, I want to thank you, first and foremost, for always motivating
me to not give up and to continue with my writing process. I also want to thank you for
tolerating and putting up with my demanding behavior. You never hesitated to lend a helping
hand, and your kind words truly assisted me in completing this project. In addition, your
expertise gave me insight as to what was needed within my study and directed me toward the
right outcomes. Many thanks to you for the immense amount of time you spent assisting me
along the way.
Active Shooter
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgments................................................................................................................3
List of Tables .......................................................................................................................7
List of Figures......................................................................................................................8
Abstract................................................................................................................................9
Chapter One: Introduction .................................................................................................10
Organizational Context and Mission .....................................................................12
Organizational Performance Status........................................................................13
Organizational Performance Goal and Current Performance ................................14
Related Literature...................................................................................................16
Importance of a Promising Practice Project...........................................................17
Description of Stakeholder Groups........................................................................18
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions ....................................................19
Conceptual and Methodological Framework.........................................................19
Definitions..............................................................................................................20
Organization of the Project ....................................................................................20
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .............................................................................22
Historical Context.................................................................................................. 22
Factors to Consider in an Active Shooter Plan ......................................................24
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences................... 27
Cultural Model Influence 1: Knowledge in Regards to the Cultural
Components Necessary for Creating an Effective Active Shooter
Safety Plan .................................................................................................33
Cultural Model Influence 2: School Leaders are Not Aware of the
Organizational Influences which Might Prevent Them From Fully
Implementing An Active Shooter Plan across the Organization ...............33
Cultural Setting Influence 2: School Leaders are Not Aware of the
Necessary Protocols Involved with Active Shooter Events.......................34
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge
and Motivation and the Organizational Context........................................35
Chapter Three: Research Methods.....................................................................................38
Conceptual and Methodological Approach ...........................................................38
Participating Stakeholders .....................................................................................39
Sampling Criterion and Rationale..........................................................................39
Data Collection and Instrumentation .....................................................................40
Data Analysis......................................................................................................... 41
Credibility and Trustworthiness.............................................................................42
Ethics......................................................................................................................42
Chapter Four: Results and Findings...................................................................................44
Participating Stakeholders .....................................................................................44
Findings..................................................................................................................46
Factors Essential for Creation and Implementation of an Active Shooter Plan.....46
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences....................................... 53
Active Shooter
6
Validated Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Needs.............................61
Summary................................................................................................................62
Chapter Five: Recommended Solutions and Conclusion................................................. 63
Knowledge Recommendations……………………………. ............................... 63
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan....................................................74
Summary................................................................................................................85
Limitations and Delimitations................................................................................86
Future Research .....................................................................................................86
Conclusion .............................................................................................................87
References..........................................................................................................................90
Appendices
Appendix A: Informed Consent.............................................................................93
Appendix B: Interview Protocol ............................................................................96
Appendix C: Active Shooter Professional Development.......................................97
Active Shooter
7
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Knowledge Worksheet…....................................................................................29
Table 2: Motivational Worksheet…..................................................................................32
Table 3: Organizational Worksheet…................................................................................35
Table 4: Participant Information.........................................................................................45
Table 5: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations...............................64
Table 6: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations ...............................68
Table 7: Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations ............................71
Table 8: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes ..............75
Table 9: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Administrators...............77
Table 10: Required Drivers to Support Administrators’ Critical Behaviors .....................78
Table 11: Components of Learning for the Program......................................................... 81
Table 12: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program........................................... 83
Active Shooter
8
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework ......................................................................................37
Figure 2. After Completion of All Active Shooter Trainings/Surveys..............................85
Active Shooter
9
ABSTRACT
1
This qualitative study explored the factors that affected King Unified School District’s
(KUSD’s) successful attainment of their goal to instruct 100% of their administrators on their
comprehensive safety plan, with a specific focus on active shooter violence prevention.
Documents from the district were analyzed, and administrators from both the primary and
secondary levels were interviewed to identify the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that assisted KUSD’s administrators with the creation and implementation of a
school-wide active shooter plan. The findings of this study revealed that the administrators
possessed the appropriate knowledge to create and implement their own active shooter plans and
provided recommendations in regard to the organizational resources needed to develop a
systematic safety plan geared toward active shooter preparedness. The findings also highlighted
the motivational influences administrators should take into consideration when developing their
own active shooter plans.
1
Pseudonym used for confidentiality
Active Shooter
10
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
School shootings are on the rise in the United States and have increased significantly
since the 1980s (Warnick, Johnson, & Rocha, 2010). Although all schools are federally
mandated to have a safety plan in place, according to the U.S. Secret Service (2016) and the
Department of Education (2013), school safety remains compromised. Though there were only
four or five school shootings in the 1980s, there have been 41 such incidents since the year 2000.
The number of incidents involving the discharge of a firearm on a school campus has increased
significantly in the last 20 years (Barker &Yoder, 2012; Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI],
2013; National Center for Educational Statistics [NCES]). The FBI (2013) stated that the highest
number of firearms-related casualties occurred in educational settings and that there have been a
total of 306 victims since the year 1980.
According to the U.S. Department of Education (2013), 3% of students reported carrying
a handgun to school in the 1980s, compared to a reported 15% in the 1990s. They also stated
that approximately 3,523 students were expelled in the 1998-1999 school year for bringing a
firearm to school. Due to this increase in the number of firearms on school campuses, there has
also been an increase in the number of school shootings nationwide (Gray & Lewis, 2015).
Since the year 2013, there have been 161 incidents involving the discharge of a firearm on a
school campus, with 40 of those involving an active shooter (Everytownresearch, 2016
According to the FBI (2013), “An active shooter is an individual actively engaged in
killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and populated area” (p. 22). Implicit in this
definition is that the subject’s criminal actions involve the use of firearms. The FBI (2013)
stated that 160 active shooter incidents occurred from 2000 to 2013, resulting in approximately
1,043 casualties, with the highest number occurring in school settings (U.S. Department of
Active Shooter
11
Education , 2013). The shootings that took place at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Sandy Hook
Elementary, and Columbine High School were key incidents that sparked a national alert in
regard to active shooters on school campuses (FBI, 2016).
Though not as deadly as previously mentioned incidents, 65% of public schools across
the nation reported at least one type of violent incident in the year 2013-2014 (Lewis & Lewis,
2015). Violent incidents were reported at 53% of elementary schools, 88% of middle schools,
and 78% of high schools/combined schools (Lewis & Lewis, 2015). Violent incidents were
defined as those that included “rape or attempted rape, sexual battery other than rape, robbery
with or without a weapon, physical attack or fight with or without a weapon, and threat of
physical attack with or without a weapon” (Lewis & Lewis, 2015, p. 17). Of these violent
incidents, 199 involved the discharge of a firearm on a school campus that resulted in either
injury or death (Everytownresearch, 2016). Due to the continued rise of firearm-related deaths
on school campuses, the FBI (2013) recommended that school leaders address the discharge of
firearms in their school safety plans.
The FBI (2013) stressed the importance of school leaders developing a comprehensive
safety plan that tracks school crime statistics, assesses the climate of the school in regard to areas
of weakness, and continuously evaluates the protocols they have in place to manage the
aftermath of a gun-related incident. In addition, under Education Code 35294, the U.S.
Department of Education (2013) required school leaders to participate in various safety-related
trainings. For instance, they recommended that school leaders familiarize themselves with laws
in relation to juveniles, that they attend trainings on how to conduct a threat assessment, and that
they reach out to surrounding agencies to assist with providing resources to both students and
staff in the event of an emergency.
Active Shooter
12
Organizational Context and Mission
The King Unified School District (KUSD) is located in Southern California and has a total
of 53,600 students. The district is made up of 49 schools: 28 elementary, 8 intermediate, 3 K-8
academies, 5 comprehensive high schools, 1 middle college, 3 alternative schools, and 1 adult
education school. The ethnic demographic of KUSD is 55% Hispanic, 26% Caucasian, 9%
Asian, 6% African American, 3% Filipino, 0.4% Pacific Islander, 0.4% American Indian, and
0.2% multiple response. A total of 44% of students are on free or reduced lunch. The mission,
commitment, and guiding principles of KUSD are to “establish and maintain high standards for
physical safety at each school campus and district facility, and to provide a safe learning
environment that meets the physical, emotional, social, and intellectual needs of their diverse
learning community” (KUSD, 2016, p. 2). There are two administrators at the elementary and
middle school level and seven administrators at the high school level. The student to teacher ratio
is 38:1.
In 2015, KUSD was ranked as one of the top districts in the county with one of the lowest
suspension rates, at 2.4%, and a 0.1% expulsion rate, which is below average for their county
(KUSD, 2016). In addition, data collected showed that after implementation of their
comprehensive safety plan, KUSD noted a significant decrease in the percentage of students who
reported feeling either unsafe or very unsafe at their school, from 8.2% in the 2009-2010 school
year to 6.6% in 2013-2014 (California Healthy Kids Survey, 2014). Since implementation of the
plan, KUSD’s suspension totals decreased from 2,464 in 2011 to 1,567 in 2016.
Organizational Performance Status
KUSD’s organizational mission is to provide a “quality education for all students within
a secure and supportive environment” (KUSD, 2016, p. 3). Their annual goal is to train 100% of
Active Shooter
13
their school administrators on their comprehensive safety plan, with a specific focus on active
shooter violence prevention. This clearly aligns with their mission. However, KUSD elected to
only train administrators due to the number of teachers within the district and their limited
availability to attend professional development off site. KUSD trained all administrators in the
hope that they would then serve as trainers for their staff.
The King Unified School District is a model organization as it received the National
School Safety Award in 2015 and 2016 (KUSD, 2016, p. 4). The National School Safety Award
is awarded by the School Safety Advocacy Council (SSAC) and is prestigious in that only one
school from each of the four regions across the United States is selected annually to receive the
award. The SSAC is comprised of a team of individuals who work closely with agencies,
districts, and organizations to advocate for public policy in legislative and regulatory arenas and
work to promote safe and secure school and community environments. The SSAC partners with
law enforcement agencies across the nation to provide the most up-to-date drills and exercises in
relation to school safety. In order to win national recognition, districts must submit their most
current safety plan to the SSAC and be evaluated by the Safety Board on an annual basis. One of
the SSAC’s key areas of focus is crisis response in the event of an active shooter (SSAC, 2016).
Organizational Performance Goal and Current Performance
KUSD’s organizational goal was to develop a comprehensive safety plan that
collaborated with local agencies to include a focus on active shooter prevention. In 2013, the
district implemented a plan to annually train 100% of their school administrators on what to do
in the event of an active shooter. The training they provided included the criteria utilized by
local law enforcement to identify at-risk behaviors, a checklist needed to conduct a threat
assessment of each school site, the necessary protocols and procedures in the event of an active
Active Shooter
14
shooter, and the available resources geared toward prevention, intervention, and crisis
management. This plan was developed over a four-year period and was put into place in the
2013-2014 school year.
In the new plan, the district entered into an agreement with two local police departments
to work together on preventing juvenile delinquency through building positive relationships with
students and creating partnerships with school administrators to provide a safe school
environment. As part of the plan, and in addition to having school resource officers at each of
their high schools, they developed the Adopt-A-School program. The program specified that
each police department would provide roving monthly coverage to all school sites, encouraging
uniformed officers to become familiar with the students, faculty, and staff at each campus and to
make themselves available to answer questions or address any safety concerns that arose. In
addition to this, as part of the plan, the district installed high-resolution cameras at each school
site. This centralized servers and allowed local law enforcement to view cameras in real time.
The district also created the Emergency Operations Center, which serves as the central command
center for district-wide response to all emergencies affecting school sites. The main functions of
the operations center are to communicate with sites during drills, conduct monthly radio checks,
and provide resources and support to school sites and administrators during crisis situations. As
part of their plan, the district also collaborated with local law enforcement to create their own
active shooter simulation activities and a video highlighting the steps school leaders should take
in response to an active shooter.
KUSD’s organizational goal is clearly aligned with their mission to provide a “quality
education to students in a secure and supportive environment” (KUSD, 2017, p. 2). The goal to
train 100% of administrators was established by the superintendent and assistant superintendent
Active Shooter
15
of Pupil Services in collaboration with the Board of Education. The goal of training 100% of
their administrators was accomplished through a partnership with local law enforcement
agencies to conduct safety assessments highlighting crime reports, suspensions, and expulsions
and assessment of both the physical environment and school climates within each of their
schools. The district put together a comprehensive school safety team that verified compliance
with Senate Bill 187 and focused on developing the necessary professional development
opportunities to train administrators on the new active shooter safety plan. The measures utilized
to track progress toward the goal included an evaluation of their annual suspension/expulsion
data, distribution of a safety assessment survey, development of a training checklist, creation of
an annual drill schedule, and collection of data from their Safe School Committee meeting notes.
Based on their recognition by the National School Safety Advocacy Council, KUSD’s
safety practices are promising. Additionally, data showed that, in comparison to five
neighboring districts with the same or similar demographics, King Unified has the lowest
number of suspensions/expulsions for violent crimes. KUSD currently has a 2.4% suspension
rate and a 0.1% expulsion rate, while surrounding districts hold between a 4% and 8%
suspension rate and between a 0.2% and 0.4% expulsion rate. Therefore, the district’s focus on
active shooter prevention has also assisted in curtailing other types of violent crime. For
example, as part of the active shooter plan, students are aware that all of their behaviors are
being monitored by local law enforcement. Data collected from the California Healthy Kids
Survey (2014) also noted that, after implementation of the new plan, the percentage of students
who reported seeing someone with a weapon on school property dropped from 22.8% in 2010 to
17.2% in 2014.
Active Shooter
16
Related Literature
A comprehensive active shooter plan consists of an initial threat assessment as it relates
to school sites (Duplechain & Morris, 2014). Duplechain and Morris (2014) stated that an active
shooter plan includes an outline of the exit and entry points of school campuses and the protocols
and procedures to identify behaviors and risk factors associated with violence related to guns.
They highlighted that 75% of school shooters were bullied or attacked by others prior to the
shooting. They clearly stated that an initial threat assessment should include preventative steps
to reduce bullying and should focus on identification of the societal risk factors—including poor
academic performance, emotional distress, social rejection by peers, past trauma, lack of parental
involvement, and domestic and sexual abuse—that encourage violent behavior. Duplechain and
Morris (2014) added that school management systems that integrate law enforcement within the
educational program are indicative of most active shooter plans. The Interdisciplinary Group on
Preventing School and Community Violence (2013), stated that law enforcement plays an active
role in assisting with implementation of violence awareness education, and they supported the
development of programs to address mental health.
Importance of a Promising Practice Project
It is imperative for school leaders to continually study crime trends and update their
safety plans because incidents of violence have a negative effect on academic achievement,
cognitive development, and students’ overall behavior in school (Beland & Kim, 2016). As
such, it is important to examine promising practices in schools that create safe learning
environments with a focus on reducing school shootings. Beland and Kim (2016) found that
standardized test scores in math and language arts were significantly lower for up to three years
following a school shooting and that the trauma suffered from violent incidents had a significant
Active Shooter
17
impact on graduation rates, attendance, and behavioral outcomes in relation to suspension rates.
Hanson (2014) stated that violent crime leads to depression and stress, both of which result in
negative peer relationships and further cause students to feel unsafe and uncomfortable in their
learning environment.
Multiple empirical studies showed that violent crimes cause students to suffer from post-
traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which leads to poor mental health and which adversely affects
students’ cognitive processes and overall academic achievement (Beland & Kim, 2016). Ding,
Lehrer, Rosenquuist, and Audrain-McGovern (2009) asserted that a student’s hippocampus and
memory integration were severely affected following an incident of violence or trauma.
Therefore, it is imperative that school leaders do everything in their power to create learning
environments in which students feel safe and secure.
Schools that have positive behavior interventions and supports (PBIS) embedded within
their safety plans create environments in which learning is maximized as students feel safe and
included in school (Gietz & McIntosh, 2014). Gietz and McIntosh (2014) highlighted the fact
that schools that do not have a comprehensive safety plan in place dedicate 50% of classroom
time to addressing disruptive behaviors, rather than to actual academic instruction. Students who
feel victimized and unsafe in their learning environment are more likely to have impaired social
relations and are more likely to skip class due to safety issues (Boyd, 2004).
According to the Every Student Succeeds Act (2015), legislation which replaced the
previous No Child Left Behind Act, public schools are required to ensure all students are college
and career ready. For students to achieve academically, their instructional programs must be
well defined and include rigor. As part of their instructional program, districts must also provide
Active Shooter
18
interventions in the academic and social-emotional behavior arenas to ensure students are able to
perform academically in a safe learning environment (U.S. Department of Education, 2013).
Description of Stakeholder Groups
The stakeholder groups that assisted with achievement of KUSD’s goal to provide a safe
environment for all students included teachers, school administrators, and the Board of
Education. The stakeholder groups consisted of six teachers from both the primary and
secondary levels, the assistant superintendent of Pupil Services, the coordinator of Student
Services, and six school-site administrators. This group worked together over a four-year period
to develop a committee dedicated to updating their comprehensive safety plan to include a
section on active shooter preparedness. As part of this committee, they collaborated with local
law enforcement to review data in relation to crime patterns and at-risk behaviors on school
campuses. The data collected guided the development of their active shooter plan and assisted
with the design and implementation of professional development opportunities for administration
and staff. The committee assisted with meeting the district’s organizational goal by creating a
safety plan that ensures a safe learning environment for all students and meets their physical,
emotional, social, and intellectual needs. While the joint efforts of all stakeholders contributed
to the achievement of the overall organizational goal, it is important to understand the promising
practices and strategies utilized by school administrators as they implemented the policies and
procedures that align with the district’s comprehensive safety plan. Therefore, the stakeholders
of focus for this promising study were school administrators from within KUSD who were part
of the district’s safety team and participated in the design of their active shooter plan.
Active Shooter
19
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
The primary purpose of this project was to study KUSD’s plan for prevention,
intervention, and crisis management in response to an active shooter on a school campus. The
secondary purpose was to identify factors that aided KUSD in creating a promising plan and
might be useful in helping other districts to emulate their success. While a complete study would
focus on all stakeholders, school administrators were chosen to participate in this study due to
their integral role in the implementation of a district-wide active shooter response. The analysis
focused on the administrators’ assets in the areas of knowledge and skill, motivation, and
organizational resources. As such, the questions that guided this promising practice study were
as follows:
1. What knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets were instrumental in
achieving KUSD’s goal of training 100% of its school administrators on
implementation of their new comprehensive active shooter plan?
2. What solutions and recommendations, particularly in regard to knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources, may be applicable to other administrators
who are attempting to create and implement active-shooter response plans?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis—a systematic, analytical method that helps to
understand organizational goal achievement—was adapted for a promising practice study and
implemented as the conceptual framework for this study. The methodological framework was a
qualitative case study with descriptive statistics. Assumed knowledge, motivation, and
organizational assets were explored based on personal knowledge and related literature. These
Active Shooter
20
influences were assessed using document analysis and interviews. Research-based solutions were
recommended and evaluated in a comprehensive manner.
Definitions
Active shooter: An individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a
confined and populated area. Implicit in this definition is that the subject’s criminal actions
involve the use of firearms.
Operations officer: A site employee who conducts facility checks and security as well as student
care and release.
Logistics officer: A site employee assigned to obtain assistance, supplies, and equipment.
Planning/Intelligence officer: A site employee assigned to analyze incidents and necessary
documentation.
Finance officer: A district employee responsible for maintaining an accurate record of damages
and costs related to an active shooter incident.
Organization of the Project
This study was organized into five chapters. This chapter provided the reader with the
key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about the inclusion of an active
shooter plan across school campuses. In addition, KUSD and its mission, goals, and
stakeholders, as well as the concept of a gap analysis, were introduced. Chapter 2 provides a
review of current literature surrounding the scope of the study. The topics of active shooter
prevention, intervention, and crisis management will be addressed. Chapter 3 details the assumed
assets for this study as well as the methodology employed, including the choice of participants,
data collection, and analysis. In Chapter 4, the data and results are assessed and analyzed.
Active Shooter
21
Chapter 5 provides recommendations for practice, based on data and literature, as well as
recommendations for implementation and evaluation of a comprehensive active shooter plan.
Active Shooter
22
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Since 2013, there has been an average of one school shooting per week across the nation
(Warnick, Johnson, Rocha, 2010). Children are being exposed to gunfire at an alarmingly high
rate, and school safety has been significantly compromised due to the increase of active shooters
(Barker & Yoder, 2012). In order to answer my research questions, I identified literature related
to the historical context influencing my problem of practice and literature highlighting the factors
to consider when developing an active shooter plan. I then located relevant literature focused on
the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences necessary for school-wide
implementation of an active shooter safety plan.
Historical Context
In 1989, governors from across 50 states came together to establish a blueprint for federal
initiatives intended to restructure American education and to assist and prepare students to
compete in the global market (Modzeleski, 1996). As part of these initiatives, President Bush
established a goal that, by the year 2000, all U.S. public schools would be safe, disciplined, and
drug free (Modzeleski, 1996). In 1994, the federal Safe and Drug Free Communities Act and the
Gun Free Schools Act were established to address the idea that students cannot learn, and
teachers cannot teach, in environments where students are victimized by the prevalence of guns
and weapons (Modzeleski, 1996).
In 1994, all primary and secondary schools in the United States were mandated by federal
law to adopt a zero-tolerance policy toward weapons (Mongan & Walker, 2012). For states to
receive federal funding, all schools had to have both a zero-tolerance expulsion policy related to
firearms and the necessary protocols and procedures in place to provide due process to those
Active Shooter
23
specific offenders (Mongan & Walker, 2012). According to Stader (2014), by 1997, 90% of all
U.S. public schools had a zero-tolerance gun policy in place.
Despite the creation of gun policies, mass shootings occurred at Columbine in 1999, Red
Lake Reservation in 2006, Virginia Tech in 2008, and Newtown, Connecticut in 2012,
highlighting the need for schools to create an active shooter plan to accompany their zero-
tolerance gun policy (Mitchell & Brendtro, 2013). According to Springhall (1999), if each of
the schools involved in the aforementioned mass shootings had some type of preventative active
shooter plan in place, the likelihood of an averted shooting would have increased significantly.
Springhall (1999) specifically highlighted the shooting that took place at Columbine High School
on April 20, 1999, as an incident where an effective plan might have proved helpful. Students
reported that the violence occurred due to taunting and bullying, and research showed that the
Columbine shooters’ plan was premeditated and included intricate maps outlining the exit and
entry points of all buildings on campus (Springhall, 1999).
At Virginia Tech, practitioners neither conducted an active shooter threat assessment, nor
actively collaborated with school officials to implement specific protocols to address gun
violence (Hong, Cho, & Lee, 2010). Hong et al. (2010) claimed that the shooter in the Virginia
Tech massacre had been previously diagnosed as depressed and angry and that his psychiatrists
failed to report his mental health status to the FBI; had they done so, the shooter would have
been unable to buy any type of firearm. Many of the shooter’s violent behaviors were either
overlooked or left undocumented by school counselors (Hong et al., 2010). Similarly, the
shooter involved in the Red Lake Senior High School shooting, which is typically referred to as
the Red Lake Reservation shooting, also demonstrated signs of anger and depression but was not
reported (Sallee, 2005).
Active Shooter
24
It was not until after the tragedies at Columbine, Red Lake Reservation, and Virginia
Tech that school boards across the nation decided to create comprehensive active shooter plans
(Martin, 2010). Some school leaders reacted to the perceived threat of an active shooter by
allocating funds for school police officers, surveillance cameras, and technology to secure the
exit and entry points of their campuses (Martin, 2013). After the September 11, 2001 terrorist
attacks, the director of the FBI called for a heightened level of security on school campuses and
stressed the need for schools to have a plan in place in the event of an active shooter or terrorist
attack (Thompson, Price, Mrdjenovich, & Khubchandani, 2009).
Factors to Consider in an Active Shooter Plan
The first step in designing an active shooter plan is for administrators to take a
comprehensive look at the culture that perpetuates violence and to use this information to
conduct a threat assessment of their school campuses (Daniels et al., 2010). As part of their
threat assessment, administrators must familiarize themselves with their site’s physical
environment and must make themselves situationally aware of the individual and societal
behaviors that foster a culture of violence (Duplechain & Morris, 2014). For school leaders to
create a safe physical environment, for example, they must limit and control entry points and
must have a system in place to alert school and law enforcement officials should an unwanted
visitor gain access to the campus (Crane, 2006). They must also implement a rigid gun free
campus policy and should work with law enforcement when creating a protocol for reporting a
gun carrier or when dealing with an active shooter situation (Thompson et al., 2009).
School leaders should utilize the most up-to-date technology and software to reduce
incidents of crime (Duplechain & Morris, 2014). For instance, since the year 2002, more than
17,000 districts across the nation have implemented the Raptor System to identify sex offenders
Active Shooter
25
and criminals who have tried to gain entry to their campuses (Raptortech, 2017). According to
Raptortech (2017), the Raptor System is a Web-based visitor management program that requires
all visitors to scan a form of identification before being permitted to step foot on a school
campus. Visitors who have a criminal background are flagged, allowing administrators to
identify visitors who might be a threat to their campus.
The second step in conducting a threat assessment involves school leaders identifying the
risk factors that might encourage violent or aggressive behavior among their students (Manthley,
2007). Manthley (2007) found that some of the personal risk factors that led to violent incidents
in schools were social rejection by peers, bullying, previous exposure to violence or abuse,
inconsistent disciplinary practices, discrimination, depression, issues related to mental health,
and involvement with gangs, drugs, or alcohol. As part of their threat assessment, school
leaders must ensure that they have the appropriate mental health resources available to recognize
an at-risk student who is experiencing a crisis and may be prone to violence.
Warnick et al. (2010) asserted that most of the children who become active shooters
come from tragic backgrounds. Many students-turned-shooters experienced extreme physical or
sexual abuse during their childhood (Warnick et al., 2010). They also stated that a lack of
hospitality in schools—typified by the educational shift toward assessment and accountability
and away from creating a welcoming environment—contributed to students experiencing fear
and humiliation and perpetuating acts of violence. Swezey and Thorp (2010) stated that few
educators received professional development training to identify students with emotional or
social problems.
According to Swezey and Thorp (2010), educators often overlook the need to establish a
relationship of trust with their students, which is necessary when creating a plan geared toward
Active Shooter
26
violence prevention and intervention. Crawford (2002) noted that in more than 80% of school
shootings, at least one other person knew about the shooter’s plan before the event took place.
He further stated that this is why it is so important for school leaders to establish an environment
of trust and to create an open-door policy where students and staff feel comfortable
communicating with one another. Increased communication might allow school leaders to better
identify at-risk students and to provide them with the necessary resources to address their social
and emotional needs
Preventing school violence must be a multidisciplinary endeavor; administrators,
counselors, teachers, and law enforcement must work together to develop a systematic plan for
prevention, intervention, and crisis management (Keehn & Boyle, 2015). For school leaders to
establish an effective safety plan, they must inform all parents and students of school policies as
they relate to safety (FBI, 2016). In addition, they must include law enforcement personnel as
members of the team (FBI, 2016). The FBI (2016) asserted that law enforcement should be
consulted on a regular basis and should assist school administrators with “determining which
specific school dynamics appear to be significant risk factors for violence in schools” (p. 118).
Law enforcement should additionally be integrated within the educational system in relation to
disciplinary management systems and should be included in violence awareness education and
programs (Snell & Volokh, 2005).
Counseling staff can also be an integral part of the safety team. School leaders can
provide them with professional development opportunities geared toward prevention and
treatment of violent and aggressive behaviors (Crepeau-Hobson, Sievering, Armstrong, & Stonis,
2012). Mental health should be a key area of focus in any safety plan, and the counseling staff
should be part of the decision-making process when implementing specific protocols to address
Active Shooter
27
school-wide safety (Crepeau-Hobson et al., 2012). Counselors should be specifically trained in
crisis response as they are responsible for conducting stress debriefings with those directly
affected should an active shooter event occur (Crepeau-Hobson et al., 2012).
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
Developing a comprehensive plan to address an active shooter situation is vital.
However, successfully implementing that plan is just as essential. This section of the literature
review will investigate the factors, including stakeholder knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences, that impacted implementation efforts at KUSD and may have
implications for implementation in other districts.
Knowledge Types
Bloom’s Taxonomy was revised from three categories to four to include metacognitive
knowledge as part of the framework (Krathwohl, 2001). Krathwohl (2001) stated that in order
for learners to learn, they must be cognizant of the metacognitive activity that is taking place and
must be clearly aware of what is expected of them. He stated that learners must be provided with
the basic factual knowledge to proceed and that they must immerse themselves in the conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive knowledge necessary to truly understand, apply, and execute their
organizational goal. Krathwohl (2001) explained that learners must begin with factual
knowledge, such as terminology or details, and must then acquaint themselves with conceptual
knowledge such as theories, models, and structures. He asserted that once learners familiarize
themselves with factual and conceptual knowledge, they must then focus on procedural
knowledge, such as methods of inquiry, and must culminate with metacognitive knowledge in
order to build awareness of their own cognition. Therefore, in order for stakeholders to achieve
Active Shooter
28
their organizational goal, they must be fully aware of the four knowledge types and their
influence on learning objectives.
Factual knowledge. For an active shooter plan to be implemented throughout an
organization, the key stakeholder group (in this case, administrators) must know the basic
principles and key components for school-wide implementation. Administrators must have the
appropriate knowledge regarding the key elements involved in an active shooting and must work
with local law enforcement in creation of their plan (Robers, Zhang, Morgan, & Musu-Gillette,
2015).
Conceptual knowledge. In addition to this, if administrators are to understand how
implementation of an active shooter plan will assist with their organizational goals, they must be
given the conceptual knowledge necessary to understand the theory behind the plan and must
acquaint themselves with the structures that allow them to function effectively. Research
showed that administrators must consider the factors that might increase the likelihood of an
attack (Borum, Cornell, Modzeleski, & Jimerson, 2010). Once they have familiarized
themselves with the necessary components geared toward prevention, they may then create
systems and procedures that educate staff on gun safety and implementation of the new plan.
Procedural knowledge. Administrators must also acquaint themselves with the
procedural knowledge necessary to create a safe learning environment that meets the physical,
emotional, and social needs of all students within the school community. For example, research
showed that administrators must have knowledge of the current processes and procedures they
have in place to address discipline, safety, and security issues (Robers et al., 2015). This way,
they will be able to refine their current practices and procedures to ensure that the safety of their
students and staff is not compromised (KUSD Handbook, 2016).
Active Shooter
29
The Knowledge Worksheet (see Table 1) describes in detail the overall organizational
goal and global goal of KUSD. The Knowledge Worksheet also includes the specific
stakeholder goal to “provide safe, secure, and positive environments for all students, staff, and
community” (KUSD Handbook, 2016, p.2). Column 1 lists the knowledge influence type,
column 2 describes the influence in detail, and column 3 describes how each knowledge type
will be assessed.
Table 1
Knowledge Worksheet
Organizational Mission
All students will be provided a quality education within a secure and supportive
environment.
Organizational Global Goal
KUSD will provide safe, secure, and positive environments for all students, staff, and
community.
Stakeholder Goal
School leaders will work with partnership agencies to implement, monitor, and evaluate
safety program effectiveness.
Knowledge influence Knowledge type (i.e.,
declarative [factual or
conceptual], procedural, or
metacognitive)
Knowledge influence
assessment
Factual
Conceptual
Declarative
Factual: Stakeholder
knowledge about the basic
components associated with
an active shooter plan.
Conceptual: Stakeholder
knowledge related to gun
safety and crime prevention.
Administrators were asked
to describe the format and
structure of an effective
safety plan and to define the
specific role active shooter
plays within their plan.
Administrators described
the 4 steps for full
implementation.
Active Shooter
30
Procedural
Procedural
Stakeholder knowledge
about the current policies
and procedures they have in
place geared toward
prevention, intervention,
and crisis management.
Administrators listed the
processes involved with
school-wide
implementation.
Metacognitive
Metacognitive
Stakeholder knowledge of
their organizational goals
and how an active shooter
plan is aligned with meeting
these goals.
Administrators interviewed
on their level of familiarity
with their safety plan and its
effectiveness in meeting
their organizational goal.
Motivational Influences
In addition to knowledge about how to formulate an active shooter plan, school leaders
must possess the motivation to include an active shooter plan within their comprehensive plan.
For learning goals and objectives to be achieved, motivational influences must be taken into
consideration (Pintrich, 2003). Pintrich (2003) asserted that, for learning to truly flourish, one
must analyze the social-cognitive models and constructs that motivate learners to learn. Pajares
(2006) supported this analysis of motivation and claimed that learners must have a heightened
sense of self-efficacy in order to feel as if their actions will produce desired outcomes. They
must feel confident in the learning process and must be willing to participate in self-regulation in
regard to personal growth (Pajares, 2006). In addition to this, learners must find value in what
they are expected to learn (Eccles, 2006). Eccles (2006) stated that in order for learners to find
value in any given task, it must align with their internal goals and beliefs. This literature review
will highlight the motivational influences that are integral in encouraging school leaders to
include an active shooter plan within their comprehensive safety plan.
Utility value. For administrators to feel motivated to include an active shooter plan
within their current safety plan, they must realize its value in meeting their overall organizational
Active Shooter
31
goal. They must be made aware of how a new plan might be beneficial within their specific area
of practice. For example, administrators must familiarize themselves with the value of effective
prevention and must understand that in order for students to achieve, they must first feel safe
within their learning environment (Borum et al., 2010).
Self-efficacy. In addition to finding value in creating an active shooter plan,
administrators should understand how it contributes to their overall sense of self-efficacy.
According to Bandura (1977), an important role in building self-efficacy is to provide learners
with mastery experiences. This is why it is imperative for administrators to work with law
enforcement to acquire the appropriate knowledge to educate other members within their
organization. This will allow school administrators to feel better prepared in an emergency
situation.
The Motivational Worksheet (see Table 2) describes in detail the overall organizational
goal and global goal of KUSD. The Motivation Worksheet also includes the specific stakeholder
goal that school leaders and partnership agencies will work together to implement, monitor, and
evaluate safety program effectiveness. Column 1 describes the motivational influences that will
encourage administrators to include an active shooter plan as part of their comprehensive safety
plan, and column 2 describes the methods used to assess their level of comfort in participation
and overall implementation.
Active Shooter
32
Table 2
Motivational Worksheet
Organizational Mission
All students will be provided a quality education within a secure and supportive environment.
Organizational Global Goal
KUSD will provide safe, secure, and positive environments for all students, staff, and
community.
Stakeholder Goal
School leaders will work with partnership agencies to implement, monitor, and evaluate
safety program effectiveness.
Organizational Influences
In addition to knowledge and motivation, school leaders must consider organizational
issues when encouraging school-wide implementation of their active shooter safety plans.
Administrators must communicate to all stakeholders how implementation of an active shooter
plan is aligned with their organizational goal and must be willing to provide the necessary
trainings and resources to educate their staff on full implementation (Thompson et al., 2009).
Assumed motivational influences Interview item to assess motivational
influence
Utility value: Administrators must see the
value in updating their current safety plans to
include an active shooter plan.
“How does including an active shooter plan
align with the goals of the organization?”
“Why is an active shooter plan geared
toward prevention, intervention, and crisis
management beneficial to all levels within
the organization?”
Self-efficacy: Administrators must gain the
appropriate knowledge to feel comfortable
educating staff on gun safety and active
shooters.
“Do I feel knowledgeable enough to educate
my staff on gun safety and active shooter
prevention?”
Active Shooter
33
Thompson et al. (2009) stressed the importance of collaborating with stakeholders to create
policies within the organization that assist with recognizing at-risk students and that provide
systematic interventions geared toward overall violence prevention.
Cultural Model Influence 1: Knowledge in regard to the cultural components
necessary for creating an effective active shooter safety plan. For change to be sustainable,
leaders must foster a climate and culture that supports change (Schneider, Benjamin, Brief, &
Guzzo, 1996). In addition, Schneider et al. (1996) asserted that for change to occur, stakeholders
must play an active role in the change process.
For school leaders to evaluate the necessary components of an active shooter plan, they
must conduct a threat assessment of their school and must evaluate the specific security measures
that best fit the culture of their organization (Borum et al., 2010). Research additionally
suggested that there is a lack of knowledge regarding threat assessment as well as how school
leaders can address barricaded hostage events (Daniels et al., 2010). School leaders are
encouraged to utilize research and the assistance of local law enforcement when designing a
safety plan tailored to meet the specific needs of their organization (FBI, 2013).
Cultural Model Influence 2: School leaders are not aware of the organizational
influences that might prevent them from fully implementing an active shooter plan across
the organization. School leaders must take into consideration the organizational resources
needed for full implementation of their plan and how this aligns with their organizational goal.
For instance, research showed school leaders must have the necessary mental health resources
available to recognize an at-risk student who might be prone to violence, and school leaders must
train educators on how to address the needs of students with social or emotional problems
Active Shooter
34
(Swezey & Thorp, 2010). School leaders must be fully aware of all factors that might perpetuate
school violence.
Cultural Setting Influence 1: School leaders are not aware of the necessary
processes involved with active shooter prevention. Research stressed the importance of
school leaders investigating planned school shootings that were successfully averted and the
processes used to successfully prevent an attack (Daniels et al., 2010). The FBI (2013) also
stated that school leaders should familiarize themselves with the processes that build a positive
school culture because this assists with the likelihood that students will report possible threats to
trusted adults.
Cultural Setting Influence 2: School leaders are not aware of the necessary protocols
involved with active shooter events. Thompson et al. (2009) stated that districts should begin
by implementing a rigid, gun free campus policy and should work with law enforcement when
creating protocols in the event of an active shooter. In addition to this, in the event of an active
shooter, school leaders must have clear protocols in place to communicate with first responders,
lock down students, and evacuate students once the area is clear (Department of Homeland
Security, 2016).
The Organizational Worksheet (see Table 3) describes in detail the overall organizational
goal and global goal of KUSD. The Organizational Worksheet also includes the specific
stakeholder goal that school leaders and partnership agencies will work together to implement,
monitor, and evaluate safety program effectiveness. Column 1 describes the organizational
influences that will assist administrators in creating a comprehensive active shooter plan, and
column 2 describes the data collection method used to highlight the necessary processes for full
school-wide implementation.
Active Shooter
35
Table 3
Organizational Worksheet
Organizational Mission
All students will be provided a quality education within a secure and supportive
environment.
Organizational Global Goal
KUSD will provide safe, secure, and positive environments for all students, staff, and
community.
Stakeholder Goal
School leaders will work with partnership agencies to implement, monitor, and evaluate
safety program effectiveness.
Assumed organizational influences Organizational influence assessment
There is a general lack of knowledge in regard to
cultural components necessary for creating an
effective active shooter plan safety plan.
Interview question asking participants for the
top 5 components one must consider when
creating an effective active shooter plan.
Cultural Model Influence 2: School leaders are
not aware of the organizational influences that
might prevent them from fully implementing an
active shooter plan across the organization.
Interview question about what factors might
prevent other school leaders from implementing
an active shooter plan school-wide.
Cultural Setting Influence 1: School leaders are
not aware of the necessary processes involved
with active shooter prevention.
Interview question asking participants to
describe the processes they have in place for
active shooter prevention.
Cultural Setting Influence 2: School leaders are
not aware of the resources needed to actively
prepare for an active shooter event.
Interview question asking participants what
resources they have in place for overall crisis
management in the event an active shooter event
took place.
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and
Motivation and the Organizational Context
A conceptual framework clarifies what issues, settings, or people will be part of the study
and what prior research will be the driving force behind it (Maxwell, 2013). In this promising
practice model, the primary stakeholders were the school leaders (administrators), and the model
assessed the knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets in relation to the organization’s
Active Shooter
36
goal of training 100% of their school administrators on implementation of a new comprehensive
safety plan. In addition to this, the study highlighted solutions and recommendations in the areas
of knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets that may be appropriate for solving the
problem of practice: active shooter preparedness at another organization.
KUSD’s organizational goal was to develop a comprehensive safety plan that
collaborated with local agencies to include a section on active shooters and to annually train
100% of their administrators on the new safety plan. Their organizational goal was clearly
aligned with their mission to provide a quality education to students in a secure and supportive
environment. This goal was established by the superintendent and assistant superintendent of
Pupil Services in collaboration with the Board of Education. The goal of training 100% of their
administrators was accomplished through a partnership with local law enforcement agencies to
conduct safety assessments highlighting crime reports, suspensions, expulsions, and assessments
of both the physical environment and climate within each of their schools. The district put
together a comprehensive school safety team that verified compliance with Senate Bill 187 and
focused on developing the necessary professional development opportunities to train
administrators on the new active shooter safety plan.
The conceptual framework (see Figure 1) highlighted how the district met its
organizational goal of training 100% of its administrators on the new active shooter plan and
addressed the motivational influences that played an important role in updating their current
safety plan. The framework additionally demonstrated how the district clearly aligned its
knowledge and motivational influences with its organizational mission to provide a quality
education to students in a secure and supportive environment.
Active Shooter
37
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework
(M) IDENTIFY
MOTIVATIONAL
INFLUENCES
Stakeholders find
value in the plan.
Stakeholders
continuously
update the plan.
Stakeholders feel
confident with their
particular role
within the plan.
(K) IDENTIFY
PROTOCOLS&
PROCEDURES
ALREADY IN
PLACE
(O) IDENTIFY
HOW FOCUS ON
ACTIVE SHOOTER
WITHIN SAFETY
PLAN IS ALIGNED
WITH GOALS OF
ORGANIZATION
Safety School and Active Shooter Plan
(K) LAW
ENFORCEMENT
CRITERIA USED
TO CREATE
AND
IMPLEMENT
PLAN
TRAINING
ON ACTIVE
SHOOTER
PLAN-100%
ADMINISTRATORS
(K) LAW
ENFORCEMENT
CRITERIA
UTILIZED TO
IDENTIFY AT-
RISK
BEHAVIOR AND
TRAININGS
PROVIDED
(O) IDENTIFY
NECESSARY
RESOURCES TO
SUPPORT
IMPLEMENTATION
(O) IDENTIFY
CULTURAL MODE
AND SETTING FOR
COMMUNICATION
OF THE PLAN TO
ALL
STAKEHOLDERS
Active Shooter
38
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODS
The purpose of this qualitative case study was to provide knowledge to school leaders
who plan to implement an effective active shooter plan as part of their comprehensive safety
plan. Under Article I, Section 28 (C) of the California Constitution, “All students and staff of
public primary, elementary, junior high, and senior high schools have the inalienable right to
attend campuses which are safe, secure, and peaceful.” For KUSD, the district examined in this
study, to be compliant with Senate Bill 187 and to meet their organizational goal of providing
“safe, secure, and positive environments for all students, staff, and community,” their
comprehensive school safety plan must be evaluated and amended as needed to identify and
assess the status of school-related crime.
It is important to study the underlying influences that assist school leaders with updating
their current school safety plans to include a portion dedicated to active shooter prevention,
intervention, and crisis management.
The following questions guided this study:
1. What knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets were instrumental in
achieving KUSD’s goal of training 100% of its school administrators on
implementation of their new comprehensive active shooter plan?
2. What solutions and recommendations, particularly in regard to knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources, may be applicable to other
administrators?
Conceptual and Methodological Approach
A gap analysis is a systematic, analytical method that helps to clarify organizational goals
and identify knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap
Active Shooter
39
analysis was adapted to this promising practice study and implemented as its conceptual
framework. The methodological framework was a qualitative case study. Assumed knowledge,
motivation, and organizational assets were generated based on personal knowledge and related
literature. These assets were assessed using interviews and document analysis. Research-based
solutions in relation to active shooter safety plans were comprehensively evaluated, and
recommendations were formulated.
Participating Stakeholders
This study focused on school administrators in KUSD because they were primarily
responsible for developing comprehensive safety plans. In addition, these school administrators
were responsible for ensuring that their schools were compliant with Senate Bill 87 and
California Education Code 35294. As such, this study used purposive sampling to identify
participants from this stakeholder group. School administrators from all educational levels, both
primary and secondary, were interviewed to uncover the specific role each played in
implementing the district’s safety plan. According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), researchers
may select a knowledgeable and skilled point of contact to provide the names of interviewees
within the study. The deputy superintendent referred administrators from both the secondary and
primary level who were primarily responsible for development of the KUSD comprehensive
active shooter plan.
Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. I interviewed a principal from both the secondary and primary levels to note
the specific knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that facilitated development of
an effective active shooter plan.
Active Shooter
40
Criterion 2. I interviewed an assistant principal from both the primary and secondary
levels to note what recommendations each had in regard to knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences needed for school-wide implementation of an active shooter plan.
Criterion 3. I selected assistant principals and principals who were part of KUSD’s
District Safety Committee and who played active roles in both development and training on the
active shooter plan.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
For this qualitative study, data were collected through interviews and document analysis.
According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), data that are conveyed through words are labeled
qualitative, and interviews are types of conversations that allow participants to engage with the
research questions. To assess the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
necessary to solve the problem of practice at another organization, I needed to gather feedback
from members within the promising district. I interviewed key leaders (administrators) who
played an integral role on the district’s safety team and in the design of their comprehensive
safety plan and also conducted a document analysis. I analyzed the district’s Project Safety Net
pamphlet, the KUSD Comprehensive Safety Plan, and KUSD’s Emergency Response Guide.
These documents assisted with answering my research questions and provided insight as to the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that might assist other administrators with
the development and implementation of their own active shooter plans.
Document Analysis
I analyzed documents from KUSD that clearly highlighted the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational influences school leaders must consider when solving this problem of practice
at another organization. I analyzed KUSD’s Project Safety Net pamphlet, Comprehensive Safety
Active Shooter
41
Plan, and Emergency Response Guide. I utilized these documents to (1) highlight the protocols
and procedures KUSD’s administrators implemented at each school site to actively prepare for
and respond to an active shooter, (2) uncover the resources they had in place to support their
active shooter plan, and (3) explore how they aligned their active shooter plan with their
organizational goal.
Interviews
I conducted a one-time interview with each of six participants. Each interview lasted
approximately 60 minutes. I interviewed six school administrators, including participants from
both the secondary and primary levels, who assisted with the design of the district’s active
shooter plan. I used a sample size of six participants because there were six administrators who
were part of the district’s safety team. These participants highlighted the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational influences administrators must consider when developing and implementing
their own active shooter plan. The interviews were formal and semi-structured, with the largest
part of the interview guided by a list of 14 questions (see Appendix B). A semi-structured
approach was utilized because specific information was desired from all participants, yet the
format still allowed for questions and issues to be explored further (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The types of questions I asked prompted participants to describe the specific protocols and
procedures that contributed to the success of their safety plan.
Data Analysis
Data analysis began during data collection. I wrote analytic memos after each interview. I
also documented my thoughts, concerns, and initial conclusions about the data in relation to my
conceptual framework and research questions. Once I left the field, interviews were transcribed
and coded and common themes were identified. In the first phase of analysis, I used open
Active Shooter
42
coding, looking for empirical codes and applying a priori codes from the conceptual framework.
I looked for the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that assisted KUSD’s
administrators with the development and implementation of a school-wide active shooter plan.
I also conducted a second phase of analysis, in which empirical and a prior codes were
aggregated into analytic/axial codes. In the third phase of data analysis, I identified pattern
codes and themes that emerged in relation to the conceptual framework and study questions and
analyzed documents for evidence consistent with the concepts in the conceptual framework.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
I worked to increase and maintain the credibility and trustworthiness of the study by
ensuring that all of my interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. I triangulated the
data utilizing document analysis and looked for common themes that emerged in relation to the
KMOs found in my conceptual framework. In addition, I utilized reflexivity when analyzing all
data collected. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) asserted that researchers must be aware of the
influence they have on what is being studied and must take into account how the research
process affects them. I avoided researcher bias by not asking participants leading questions and
by carefully analyzing the collected data. For instance, because I am an administrator in a
different district, I asked questions that were neutral in nature and that focused solely on
respondents’ language. Although I am not a member of the organization in which I conducted
my study, I practiced reflexivity by taking into consideration my personal biases as a school
administrator and how they might affect the outcome of my study.
Ethics
As a qualitative researcher, I engaged in an inquiry process to collect data and to analyze
its meaning within the context of my study. To ensure that the rights of my participants were
Active Shooter
43
protected, I notified them of the nature of my study. I also submitted my study to the University
of Southern California’s Institutional Review Board and followed all rules and regulations as
they pertained to the protection of rights and welfare of my participants. I ensured that my
interviews followed ethical guidelines by providing participants with an informed consent form
at the commencement of my study. During the data collection phase, I notified my interviewees
that their participation was confidential and voluntary and that they could withdraw participation
at any time.
Once my participants signed their informed consent forms, I obtained permission to audio
record their interviews and assured them that their recordings would be discarded within one
month of the interview. I stored all recordings on my password protected personal laptop to
ensure the confidentiality of all participants. I also reminded participants that, though I had not
provided any incentives to coerce them, at the conclusion of my study, I would send them a
small monetary gift card to thank them for participating in my study.
Active Shooter
44
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The purpose of this project was to study KUSD’s performance related to a larger problem
of practice: prevention, intervention, and crisis management in relation to active shooters on
school campuses. While a complete study would focus on all stakeholders, due to their integral
role in the implementation of a district-wide active shooter response, school administrators were
chosen to participate in this study. This analysis focused on the administrators’ assets in the areas
of knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational resources. As such, the questions that
guided this promising practice study were as follows:
1. What knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets were instrumental in
achieving KUSD’s goal of training 100% of its school administrators on
implementation of their new comprehensive active shooter plan?
2. What solutions and recommendations, particularly in regard to knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources, may be applicable to other administrators
who are attempting to create and implement active-shooter response plans?
One-on-one interviews and document analysis were used to collect data in this study. This
chapter will present findings in response to the first research question, while Chapter 5 will
address findings related to the second research question.
Participating Stakeholders
A purposive sample of six participants was used to gather an in-depth perspective on the
KUSD administrators’ knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets related to the design,
implementation, and training on a comprehensive active shooter plan. The study also
highlighted the participants’ solutions and recommendations, particularly in regard to
knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources, that may be applicable to other
Active Shooter
45
administrators who are attempting to create and implement active shooter response plans. The
participants for this study were six school administrators, from the primary and secondary levels,
who were part of KUSD’s Safety Committee. These individuals authored KUSD’s
comprehensive active shooter plan and facilitated district-wide emergency response trainings at
each school-site. All six administrators participated in a 60-minute long, one-on-one interview
and responded to 14 open-ended questions (see Appendix B). These interview questions were
created to elicit their perspectives on the creation and implementation of a district-wide safety
plan, with a specific focus on active shooter preparedness. Respondents highlighted the
organizational assets that were instrumental in KUSD training 100% of their administrators on
how to avert an active shooter, the protocols to implement should an active shooter situation
occur, and the steps to take to address post incident recovery. Table 4 provides the stakeholders’
names, the positions they held and the school level in which they worked at the time of the study,
and the specific role they played on KUSD’s Safety Committee.
Table 4
Participant Information
Name
(Pseudonym)
Type of
administrator
Level Role/Responsibilities
John Assistant
principal
Secondary/
high school
District safety trainings, comprehensive
safety plan, and Emergency Response Guide.
Ronald Principal Secondary
/high school
District safety trainings, comprehensive safety
plan, Emergency Response Guide, Project
Safety Net Pamphlet.
Justine Assistant
principal
Secondary/
middle
school
District safety trainings, comprehensive safety
plan,
Christopher Principal Secondary/
middle
school
District safety trainings, comprehensive safety
plan, Emergency Response Guide, Project
Safety Net Pamphlet.
Benjamin Principal Primary/
elementary
school
District safety trainings, comprehensive safety
plan, Emergency Response Guide, Project
Safety Net Pamphlet.
Active Shooter
46
Margie Assistant
principal
Primary/
elementary
school
District safety trainings and comprehensive
safety plan.
Findings
Findings from this study provided solutions and recommendations in the areas of
knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources that may be appropriate for other
administrators to consider when implementing their own active shooter response plans.
Evidence from this study validated the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
presented in the conceptual framework and identified in the literature reviewed. Knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences were found to be valid if they were present in four out
of six (66%) of the participants’ responses. In addition, findings revealed the main factors that
played an important role in KUSD training 100% of their school administrators on
implementation of their active shooter plan
Factors Essential for Creation and Implementation of an Active Shooter Plan
Five main factors emerged that were essential to KUSD’s development and
implementation of its active shooter plan. The following factors were aligned with the
conceptual framework and provided insight related to KUSD’s cultural model and setting.
• Inclusion of all stakeholders in design of the plan
• Collaboration with law enforcement in active shooter trainings.
• Physical threat assessments and vulnerability assessments of each school site
• Active shooter trainings geared toward educating stakeholders on the behaviors that
may indicate a person is a potential threat
• Opportunities to participate in simulated active-shooter drills
Active Shooter
47
The data highlighted KUSD’s administrators’ initial step of including all stakeholders in
updating their current safety plans to include a focus on an active shooter. This addressed
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that contributed to KUSD’s successful
implementation of their active shooter plan. Findings revealed that, in addition to inclusion of all
stakeholders, KUSD’s administrators collaborated with law enforcement to identify safety gaps
within their current protocols and systems. KUSD’s administrators also worked with law
enforcement to conduct threat assessments of each school site, to provide active shooter
education, and to assist with emergency drills.
Inclusion of all Stakeholders in Design of the Plan
Consistent with Schneider et al.’s (1996) assertion that in order for change to be
sustainable, all stakeholders from within the organization must be included in the change
process, KUSD’s administrators stressed the importance of including parents, teachers, and staff
in the design of an active shooter plan. This was also consistent with the conceptual framework
for this study and highlighted the importance of empowering others to produce desired outcomes.
Respondents stressed the integral role stakeholders played in identifying areas of weakness
within their current safety plan and in defining their specific responsibilities in the event of an
active shooter. Similarly, all documents analyzed elaborated on the duties expected of each
stakeholder from within the organization as part of KUSD’s active shooter plan. All six
participants also mentioned soliciting input from other members of the school and community.
For example, Ronald, a high school principal stated, “I think that people should talk to one
another and discuss their concerns and help develop the plan together. The more eyes that can
see the plan, the more likely we are to find areas that can be improved.”
Assistant Principal Justine added the following:
Active Shooter
48
The plan must be in line with district and local authority recommendations and
guidelines. It must be developed via a deep analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of
the site. Many eyes and ears have to be involved in order to be effective. Roles are
designated on campus to key staff members to guarantee effectiveness in real situations.
If the process involves all stakeholders, including students, not only will you develop a
solid plan with a lot of buy-in, you will also develop stronger relationships with all
parties, which is always good for any organization.
All administrators interviewed stressed the importance of including all stakeholders in the
development of an active shooter plan and the importance of having everyone assist with
conducting a needs assessment of the campus. In addition, they stressed that inclusion of all
stakeholders not only defines the roles of all constituents involved, but also assists with creating
buy-in. The three documents I analyzed also reinforced the idea of stakeholder inclusion in
development of the plan, as each listed the specific role teachers, staff, administrators, and
parents played in both creation and implementation of KUSD’s comprehensive active shooter
plan. For example, KUSD’s Project Safety Net Pamphlet (2016) stated, “Staff, students, and
members of our community fill a vital role, and open communication between home and school
is critical to the safety and wellbeing of students” (p. 2). The pamphlet further described the
specific responsibilities of security attendants, school resource officers, counselors, teachers,
administrators, district personnel, and parents within their active shooter plan.
According to the documents I analyzed, KUSD’s security attendants are responsible for
checking in all visitors and are trained to handle issues related to student safety. School resource
officers are responsible for investigating crimes and working with administrators to provide
resources related to school safety. Counselors are responsible for securing the psychological and
Active Shooter
49
emotional safety of students and staff, and teachers are tasked with reviewing critical incident
procedures. Administrators and district personnel provide all active shooter trainings and
implement safeguards to address safety concerns. The pamphlet also invites parents to view all
active shooter training videos and to contact the district with all thoughts and ideas that might
enhance school safety (KUSD, 2016). Similarly, KUSD’s Emergency Response Guide (2016)
and Comprehensive Safety Plan (2017) also list the responsibilities of stakeholders within their
active shooter plan and stress the district’s focus on including all stakeholders in refinement of
practices and procedures related to school safety.
Inclusion of Law Enforcement in Active Shooter Trainings
In accordance with the knowledge influences listed in Chapter two, all administrators
interviewed stressed the importance of collaborating with law enforcement to conduct physical
threat assessments of each school site and discussed the effectiveness of utilizing law
enforcement to assist with active shooter trainings. Six out of the six administrators interviewed
also mentioned that they worked with law enforcement to educate staff on the types of behaviors
and signs that might indicate a person is a potential threat. For example, Margie, an assistant
principal at the elementary level, commented, “The first step in creating an effective active
shooter plan is to develop a plan for our school that is in line and in collaboration with the
outlines and guidance of our school district and law enforcement” Christopher, a principal at the
middle school level, stated the following:
You need to develop a knowledgeable team to develop the plan. You must include people
with law enforcement and years of experience at the actual school site. You should take
into consideration the actual physical plant of the school. What can be locked and where
are your vulnerabilities? The goal is to limit the loss of life, prevent injury, and provide
Active Shooter
50
first aid as quickly as possible. Design a plan that can get law enforcement to the action
ASAP including real time information.
Findings from this study were clearly aligned with Duplechain and Morris’ (2014)
research, which stated that in order for administrators to establish an effective safety plan, they
must collaborate with law enforcement personnel in the design and implementation of their plan.
Data collected also revealed the importance of administrators working with law enforcement to
develop a threat assessment checklist assessing points of entry, visitor procedures, and protocols
in place for crisis management. Respondents stated that inclusion of law enforcement was
imperative in designing their plan because it helped them to problem-solve as well as to gain
knowledge on how to work with first responders should an emergency situation arise.
Physical Threat Assessments and Vulnerability Assessments of Each School Site
Dufresne (2005) found that a crucial element to keeping students safe was the ability of
administrators to continuously conduct physical threat assessments of their campuses to limit
entry points and to ensure all areas were supervised. Consistent with Dufresne’s findings, all
administrators interviewed discussed the important role physical threat assessments play in
addressing holes within their current safety plan and in creating an environment where student
safety is the first priority. Continuously updating the safety plan also aligns with the
motivational influences and organizational influences identified in the conceptual framework for
this study.
Benjamin, a principal of an elementary school, stated,
Conducting a continuous assessment of your site is imperative to ensure student safety.
Administrators should be looking to limit the access one has to come on campus, and
should check to make sure that all gates and doors are locked. Continuous threat
Active Shooter
51
assessments not only help keep intruders away, but also help with keeping safety hazards
to a minimum.
Similarly, Ronald, a high school principal, stated, “It is important to continue to assess and
reassess the effectiveness of the plan”
All participants interviewed emphasized the value of conducting threat assessments as a
means to target areas of need and to determine what education and trainings they should offer.
KUSD’s Emergency Preparedness document and their Project Safety Net booklet also stressed
the importance of utilizing threat assessments to develop further education geared toward active
shooter preparedness.
Education on How to Identify Aggressive Behavior
Crepeau-Hobson et al. (2012) recommended school leaders provide staff with multiple
opportunities for staff development geared toward mental health and how to recognize
aggressive behaviors that might lead to a possible attack. Consistent with Crepeau-Hobson et
al.’s findings, all administrators interviewed discussed the need for continuous training aimed at
identifying at-risk behaviors and addressing those behaviors to prevent a possible active shooter
situation. For example, Ronald, a high school principal, stated,
As school leaders we not only have the opportunity but the obligation to be the tip of the
spear when it comes to enhancing school safety. It is our responsibility to seek out
training and education identifying and assessing behavior and signs that may be the
precursor to a violent incident. We need to make sure this training and education makes it
to staff at every corner of our campus. We should feel confident that if any of the
behavior or warning signs present themselves our staff knows exactly how to act even if
it’s just notifying us of the information.
Active Shooter
52
John, an assistant principal at the high school level, expressed similar sentiments:
We need to work closely with law enforcement to train on signs to look for when dealing
with behaviors which might lead to violence. We should seek their assistance when
referring students to the department of mental health. Our local police department is
always up to date with where students and staff can go to deal with issues related to
mental health. For example, the CREST team is an excellent resource for teens.
In addition to educating all stakeholders on at-risk behaviors and mental health,
interviewees stated that education must outline the specific protocols and procedures to follow in
an active shooter situation. Findings aligned with the conceptual framework, which specified
that trainings should be provided on how to identify potentially threatening behavior.
Active Shooter Drills
All administrators interviewed also discussed the important role active-shooter drills
played in ensuring that everyone within the organization was familiar with their safety plan.
They all expressed the same notion that, in order for the plan to be successful, drills must be
conducted on a continuous basis. They felt that allowing staff more opportunities for practice
would help them identify areas in need of improvement. This aligns with the motivational
influences needed for staff to build upon their sense of self-efficacy, as identified in the
conceptual framework for this study. Benjamin, a principal at the elementary school, stated the
following:
You should utilize the active shooter drills to take a hard look at the holes and
weaknesses that can be patched up. In other words, maximize the information that drills
provide. Utilize the staff and specifically the safety team to have many eyes, ears, and
Active Shooter
53
opinions in order to develop the best plan possible. Continue to assess and reassess the
effectiveness of the plan.
Ronald, a principal at the high school level, also stated,
Anyone has the ability to call a lock down on campus. We have a specific ring tone that
the students know is for lock downs. Students are trained through a series of at least four
practices to find the nearest room to shelter in place. Lights get turned off, students locate
themselves in the least exposed location of the room on the floor, they stay silent, the
teacher monitors our Remind blasts and email for information.
KUSD’s Project Safety Net booklet and their Emergency Preparedness document both
included steps and protocols administrators should follow when practicing drills at each school
site. Each document clearly outlined the important roll drills play in assisting with active shooter
preparedness and incident recovery.
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
The data collected through document analysis and participant interviews clearly aligned
with the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences found in the conceptual
framework and literature reviewed in Chapter 2.
Knowledge Influences
The data revealed that all of the participants interviewed possessed the necessary
knowledge to effectively create and implement a school-wide active shooter plan geared toward
active shooter prevention, intervention, and crisis management. Three types of knowledge were
evaluated in this study: (1) administrators’ knowledge of the basic components of an active
shooter plan (i.e., declarative), (2) administrators’ knowledge of the processes and protocols
involved in implementing the plan school-wide (i.e., procedural), and (3) administrators’
Active Shooter
54
knowledge related to how creating an active shooter plan assists with meeting their
organizational goal (i.e., metacognitive).
Declarative. In order for administrators to effectively design and implement an active
shooter plan school-wide, they must be familiar with the basic principles involved in an active
shooting (Robers et al., 2015). In addition, administrators must be familiar with the factors that
might contribute to preventing an attack (Borum et al., 2010). Of the six participants
interviewed, all were familiar with the basic design of an active shooter plan, and all were able to
list factors that might increase the likelihood of an attack. John, an assistant principal at the high
school level, stated the following:
The first component is to develop an effective team that is comprehensive and is
representative of the school. Second, develop a plan that is in line and in collaboration
with the outlines and guidance of our school district. Third, schedule consistent
meetings that are structured and goal oriented. Fourth, maintain constant feedback and
communication with key district personnel that oversee safety plan at the district level.
Fifth, make sure that in developing the plan there is a variety of input and revision to
ensure that all areas of concern are covered.
Margie, an assistant principal at the elementary school level, added,
They need to put themselves in the shoes of the shooter in order to develop a plan that
will actually work. They also need to be realistic and understand that people will panic.
They will need to develop “muscle memory” in the staff and students so they don’t have
to think, they just need to react.
All respondents stressed the importance of administrators familiarizing themselves with
the basic components involved in active shooter preparedness and collaborating with all levels in
Active Shooter
55
the organization to address areas of weakness in relation to school safety. Data collected also
highlighted the need for administrators to provide stakeholders with the appropriate knowledge
to prevent an attack. Findings revealed that for school-wide implementation to be effective,
administrators must first be aware of all elements involved in an active shooter situation.
Procedural. For learning to occur, individuals must learn how to complete a given task
and must be able to define given steps in a procedure (Clark, Feldon, van Merriënboer, Yates, &
Early, 2016). All participants interviewed stated that, for administrators to have an effective
active shooter plan in place, they must be familiar with the protocols and procedures needed to
prevent an active shooter situation and must know how to intervene in the event of an intruder or
shooter on campus. In addition, participants stressed that they must have a plan in place to handle
the aftermath should an active shooter situation arise. Margie, an assistant principal at the
elementary level, stated,
The key to crisis management is having proper policies and procedures in place to handle
such incidents should they occur. Policies and procedures alone will not be effective in
the event of a critical incident. You must have personnel in place that are properly trained
and prepared to carry out the responsibilities of those policies and procedures.
Christopher, a principal from the middle school level, added the following:
In an actual shooter event, there must be an outlined list of protocols and procedures for
all staff to follow. For example, we require that all classroom doors are locked
immediately. If there is a student in the immediate vicinity of a class and a teacher can
pull them in then they can do so prior to shutting the door.
Data collected emphasized the need for protocols and procedures to be clearly defined
within an active shooter response plan. Participants interviewed discussed how protocols and
Active Shooter
56
procedures should not focus only on active shooter preparedness, but should also address post-
crisis response. They all mentioned the importance of having relocation and reunification
procedures in place should an actual shooting take place.
Metacognitive. In addition to stressing the importance of having the proper protocols in
place to address an active shooter situation, six out of the six administrators interviewed
discussed the important role metacognition played in the development of their plan. In support
of Pintrich’s (2003) findings, all administrators stated that, for their safety plans to truly meet the
individual needs of their campuses, they had to allow time for self-assessment and self-
questioning focused on areas of weakness and what they could do to enhance the safety of their
campuses. Margie, an assistant principal at the elementary school, commented, “In order for a
plan to be effective, administrators must continuously revise their plans and should take note of
areas that can be improved” Similarly, Ronald, a high school principal asserted, “Leaving time
for assessment and revision of my plan encourages me to plan activities for my staff which
address our areas of weakness.”
All administrators mentioned that to address the specific safety needs of their campuses,
it was imperative to frequently conduct a needs assessment and to provide the most up-to-date
security measures. Data collected also acknowledged the important role evaluation played in
administrators’ development of trainings to address areas of weakness within their current plans.
Motivational Influences
Consistent with Pajares’ (2006) research, six out of six administrators mentioned the
importance of motivating all stakeholders to adopt an active shooter plan by demonstrating that
the plan was not only valuable in meeting the district’s goals but was also aligned with their own
goals and beliefs. They stressed the importance of administrators highlighting how creating a
Active Shooter
57
safe learning environment is directly related to student achievement across all subject areas
(Borum et al., 2010). Benjamin, a principal at the elementary level, stated,
Taking a hard look at any process at the school level is key in the development and
growth of the school and its culture. This is especially key when the stakes are so high,
especially in the wake of so many events across the world that have to do with violence,
especially violence targeted at schools. Unfortunately developing this plan is not a
luxury in this day and age, it is an absolute necessity. Everyone within the organization
must understand that in order for students to be successful in school, they must feel safe
coming to school.
Consistent with Benjamin’s statement, John, an assistant principal at the high school level, added
the following:
I feel that leaders need to build ownership in the process and the plan, and if a mistake is
made they should use it as a coaching moment. We must also communicate that before
anything else, student safety is our number one goal, and I want to empower people to
make decisions on student safety.
All administrators interviewed stressed the importance of school leaders utilizing
motivational influences to assist with school-wide implementation of the plan. They all stated
that, for an active shooter plan to be effectively put in place, all stakeholders must find value in
the plan, must assist with updating the plan, and must feel confident in their particular role within
the plan.
Organizational Influences
The organizational influences evaluated in this study identified the cultural mode and
setting KUSD’s administrators used to assist with communicating their active shooter plan to all
Active Shooter
58
stakeholders. In addition, the study identified how a focus on active shooters within their safety
plans aligned with the goals of their organization and identified the necessary resources to
support school-wide implementation.
Threat assessments related to school culture. For administrators to implement an
effective plan, they must work with local law enforcement to evaluate the cultures of their
campuses as they relate to safety and to take note of what measures they have in place to
promote a safe learning environment (Borum et al., 2010). In support of this notion, all
interviewed administrators mentioned conducting threat assessments on a continuous basis and
working with law enforcement to conduct a needs assessment of the resources needed to ensure
the safety of their campuses. For example, Benjamin, a principal at the elementary level,
discussed the important role threat assessments play in pointing out safety hazards campus-wide:
“The key to intervention is assessment and mitigation. Proper assessment of potential threats
utilizes all information available to create the safest campus possible. Once a threat assessment
is conducted, you can then work on areas of weakness”
The data I collected emphasized the important role threat assessments play in determining
the vulnerability points of individual school-sites. Findings described how threat assessments
are an integral component in developing systems that control building access. All respondents
explained that they utilize threat assessments to identify plausible threats and to evaluate whether
the safety measures they have in place are indeed a deterrent to crime.
Resources. The findings provided information on resources that assisted KUSD in
receiving recognition as a model district in school safety, with a specific focus on active shooter
prevention. All administrators interviewed discussed their use of the Raptor System to identify
potential intruders; their collaboration with law enforcement to assist with trainings, drills,
Active Shooter
59
supervision, and monitoring their cameras; and their use of Interquest Detection Canines to
detect narcotics, ammunition, and firearms on their campuses. In addition, four out of six
administrators discussed the specific programs they had in place to assist with issues related to
mental health and to assist with promoting a safe and welcoming environment. For instance,
John, an assistant principal at the high school level, stated,
The entire school team works on developing rapport with our students starting with Link
Crew before the school year even starts. Any concerns are directed to administration and
our safety and Violence Prevention counselor, who is part of our district’s Crisis
Intervention Team. We do our best to investigate any and all situations that are brought to
our attention, and work closely with law enforcement to make the proper referrals related
to mental health.
Christopher, a principal at the middle school level, added the following:
We work closely with our school psychologist to identify individuals who are in need of
counseling or who are demonstrating aggressive behaviors. We are also visited by the
Interquest canines on a monthly basis. The dogs are great because they assist us with
finding any illegal drugs or firearms which might have gone undetected. Our cameras
and dogs serve as a great deterrent to crime.
The findings in this study identified resources other administrators might utilize when
developing their own active shooter plan. The documents analyzed also described the function
of each resource in detail and clarified how specific resources assist with active shooter
preparedness. For example, KUSD’s (2017) Comprehensive Safety Plan explained how a school
surveillance plan is embedded within their active shooter plan. KUSD’s (2016) Project Safety
Active Shooter
60
Net Pamphlet also explained how the Interquest canines and cameras assist with averting a
possible attack.
Protocols and procedures. The Department of Homeland Security (2016) stated that
school leaders must have specific protocols in place to address the key components involved in
active shooter prevention, intervention, and crisis management. All administrators interviewed
in this study were able to list the specific protocols their organization had in place for students
and staff to report possible threats, communicate with first responders, lock down students, and
evacuate students in an active shooter event. In accordance with KUSD’s Project Safety Net
pamphlet, five out of six administrators also mentioned that they utilized the district’s active
shooter training videos to educate themselves and parents on how to identify an active shooter, to
highlight preventative measures in place to address potential safety concerns, and to increase
their level of preparedness in the event of an active shooter. Justine, an assistant principal at the
middle school, stated,
One of the best resources our district has to prepare for an active shooter is our active
shooter training videos. Anytime a parent asks what measures we have in place to keep
their children safe, I always refer them to our district website where the videos are easily
accessible. I also feel that our frequent drills help students and staff feel safe and
confident in what they should do if an actual shooting takes place.
Similarly, John, an assistant principal at the high school level, mentioned how helpful the
district’s training videos have been in reinforcing everyone’s role in the event of an active
shooter:
I try to keep a couple of our district pamphlets on hand to hand out to parents, teachers, or
staff who might have questions about safety. The pamphlet is a great resource because it
Active Shooter
61
lists important numbers to contact in the event of an emergency and where they can find
training videos related to safety. It breaks down each active shooter training video by
topic and provides a direct link to where they can find the videos.
Consistent with Clark and Estes’ (2008) research, which found that organizations that
hope to promote change must first identify gaps within their current structure and provide the
resources needed to achieve a desired goal, findings from this study validated the organizational
influences school leaders should consider when creating and implementing their own active
shooter plans. In particular, findings revealed that all administrators interviewed stressed the
importance of the organization aligning its plans with the district’s mission and goals, conducting
continuous threat assessments of their sites to identify gaps within their current plan to identify
needed resources, and communicating all active shooter protocols and procedures to all levels of
the organization.
Validated Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Needs
The findings in this study indicated that the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences KUSD’s administrators utilized to design and implement their own active shooter
plans were connected to one another—and, at some points in the study, even overlapped. For
example, the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that were clearly aligned
after completing the study at KUSD were as follows:
• Administrators’ declarative knowledge regarding the key components needed in an
active shooter plan and the procedural knowledge to implement protocols designed to
respond to an active shooter event.
Active Shooter
62
• Administrators’ motivational needs in order to feel confident implementing active
shooter protocols school-wide and the motivational influences they must account for
when encouraging buy-in from all stakeholders within the organization.
• Administrators’ organizational influences related to the resources needed to meet
their goal of providing a quality education to students in a secure and supportive
environment.
The findings in this study were consistent with Clark and Estes’ (2008) theory that for
leaders to promote change that is both sustainable and effective, they must ensure that their
organization addresses stakeholders’ knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs. It is
important for leaders to provide stakeholders with the appropriate knowledge to support change
and with opportunities to feel motivated to work toward a common goal. In addition, leaders
must ensure that stakeholders have the appropriate resources to achieve desired outcomes.
Summary
This chapter presented data that addressed the first research question: What knowledge,
motivation, and organizational assets were instrumental in achieving KUSD’s goal of training
100% of its school administrators on implementation of their new comprehensive active shooter
plan? The findings revealed that, for KUSD’s administrators to effectively implement their new
safety plan, they needed to account for all of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
factors that assisted with school-wide implementation. In the next chapter, I will address the
second research question and will provide solutions and recommendations in the areas of
knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources that may be appropriate for other
administrators who are planning to implement their own active shooter response plan.
Active Shooter
63
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDED SOLUTIONS AND CONCLUSION
The purpose of this project was to study KUSD’s performance related to a larger problem
of practice: prevention, intervention, and crisis management in relation to active shooters on
school campuses. While a complete study would focus on all stakeholders, for practical
purposes, this study focused on school administrators. The analysis focused on the
administrators’ assets in the areas of knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational
resources. Chapter four addressed the first research question of this study by validating the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets that assisted KUSD in meeting their goal of
training 100% of their school administrators on implementation of their comprehensive active
shooter plan. This chapter will discuss the significance of the findings in relation to research-
based recommendations for administrators to consider when implementing their own active
shooter plans. Similar to those in Chapter four, the recommendations in this chapter are
organized into validated knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. Chapter five will
conclude with an explanation of how the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016) will be used to implement and evaluate the suggested recommendations.
Knowledge Recommendations
Data collected from documents analyzed and participants interviewed revealed various
knowledge influences that assisted stakeholders with achievement of their organizational goal.
Krathwol’s (2001) model was used to identify the knowledge influences that were instrumental
in KUSD’s implementation of an active shooter response plan. Findings were examined based on
Krathwol’s (2001) notion that for learners to learn, they must be provided with declarative and
procedural knowledge and must be given opportunities to monitor their own learning. Findings
revealed that for administrators to effectively implement an active shooter plan, they must be
Active Shooter
64
given declarative knowledge (i.e., knowledge about the basic components associated with an
active shooter plan), procedural knowledge (i.e., knowledge about the protocols and procedures
involved with active shooter prevention, intervention, and crisis management), and
metacognitive knowledge (i.e., knowledge on how to monitor and evaluate their safety plans on a
continuous basis). Table 5 describes the validated knowledge influences in this study and the
context-specific recommendations based on theoretical principles to address those knowledge
needs.
Table 5
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed knowledge
influence: Cause,
need, or asset
Validated
yes (V),
high
probability
(HP), or no
(N)
Priority
Yes
(Y), No
(N) Principle
Context-specific
recommendation
Stakeholder
knowledge about the
basic components
associated with an
active shooter plan.
(D)
HP Y “Performance requires
knowledge of basic
facts, information and
terminology related to a
topic” (Krathwohl,
2002, p. 32).
Provide a job aid
highlighting active
shooter
terminology as
well as the key
areas of focus in an
active shooter
plan.
School leaders are
not aware of the
necessary protocols
and procedures
involved with active
shooter prevention,
intervention, and
crisis management.
(P)
HP Y “Procedural knowledge
is required for all
skilled performance.
Skill acquisition often
begins with learning
declarative knowledge
about discrete steps in a
procedure” (Clark et
al., 2016, p. 54).
Provide training
outlining the
necessary
protocols and
procedures
associated with
active shooter
prevention,
intervention, and
crisis management.
Active Shooter
65
School leaders must
conduct a threat
assessment of their
school campuses and
must collaborate
with local law
enforcement to
create an active
shooter checklist.
School leaders must
then monitor,
evaluate, and update
their plans on a
continuous basis.
(M)
HP Y “Metacognition
involves planning,
monitoring, and
evaluating one's own
learning processes”
(Flavel, 1997, p. 15).
Have law
enforcement
provide training on
creation of an
active shooter
checklist, in which
administrators may
monitor and
evaluate their
plans.
Clark (2012) stated that skill acquisition begins with declarative knowledge. The
context-specific recommendation suggests that administrators build upon their declarative
knowledge in regard to active shooters by participating in professional development
opportunities led by law enforcement and by providing job aids to all levels of the organization
to assist with their active shooter response. In addition, the context-specific recommendation
suggests administrators evaluate and monitor their active shooter plans on a continuous basis
utilizing a checklist created by local law enforcement agencies.
Declarative knowledge solutions. According to Krathwohl (2002), for stakeholders to
work toward a specific goal, they must be provided with declarative knowledge. Krathwohl
(2002) stated that stakeholders must be provided with facts, terminology, and background
information related to their problem. This suggests that providing stakeholders with a job aid
that defines important terminology and highlights key areas of focus would foster the learning
process. The recommendation is to provide administrators with a job aid similar to that of
KUSD’S Emergency Response Guide (2017) which defines active shooter terminology and lists
key areas of focus from within an active shooter plan.
Active Shooter
66
Robers et al. (2015) stated that administrators must have appropriate knowledge
regarding the key elements involved in an active shooting. Schraw and Lehman (2009) stated
that learning is enhanced when stakeholders are provided with training materials that are “clear,
coherent, and complete” (p. 27). Therefore, providing administrators with a job aid that clearly
defines the necessary components geared toward prevention would allow them to create systems
and procedures to educate staff on gun safety and on the specific roles they play in the event of
an active shooter.
Procedural knowledge solutions. Procedural knowledge is the “how-to” knowledge
required for all skilled performance (Clark et al., 2016). Organizational research indicated that
school leaders are not aware of the necessary protocols and procedures involved in active shooter
prevention, intervention, and crisis management. As per the research found in the literature
review, administrators must acquaint themselves with the procedural knowledge necessary to
create a safe learning environment that meets the physical, emotional, and social needs of all
students within the school community. All administrators interviewed, stressed the need for
training to be provided that outlines the necessary protocols and procedures associated with
active shooter prevention, intervention, and crisis management.
Research indicated that administrators must have knowledge of the current processes and
procedures they have in place to address discipline, safety, and security issues (Robers et al.,
2015). Beyond this, they must also have the ability to refine their current practices and
procedures to ensure that the safety of their students and staff is not compromised (KUSD
Handbook, 2016). In order for an active shooter plan to be implemented throughout the
organization, the key stakeholder group (administrators) must know the basic principles and key
components for school-wide implementation.
Active Shooter
67
Metacognitive knowledge solutions. Bloom’s Taxonomy was revised from three
categories to four to include metacognitive knowledge as part of the framework (Krathwohl,
2001). Krathwohl (2001) stated that for learners to learn, they must be cognizant of the
metacognitive activity that is taking place and must be clearly aware of what is expected of them.
Flavel (1997) stated that metacognition encourages individuals to evaluate their own learning
through planning and monitoring. School leaders should evaluate the necessary components of
an active shooter plan and work with local law enforcement to conduct a threat assessment of
their school (Borum et al., 2010).
Baker (2006) stated that for stakeholders to participate in the metacognitive process, they
must be provided with opportunities to participate in “guided self-monitoring and self-
assessment” (p. 126). All administrators interviewed mentioned how law enforcement should
provide training on the creation of an active shooter checklist, and administrators should utilize
the checklist to continuously monitor, evaluate, and update their safety plan. Training from law
enforcement would provide administrators with the necessary guidance to effectively assess the
safety of their campuses and effectively address areas of need (Beland & Kim, 2016).
Motivation Recommendations
The motivation influences in Table 6 represent the complete list of assumed motivation
influences and their probability of being validated based on the most frequently mentioned
motivation influences to achieving the stakeholders’ goal during formal semi-structured
interviews and supported by document analysis, literature review, and motivational learning
theory. As such, as indicated in Table 6, some motivational influences have a high probability of
being validated and have a high priority for achieving the stakeholders’ goal. Table 6 also shows
the recommendations for these influences based on theoretical principles.
Active Shooter
68
Table 6
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed motivation
influence: Cause, need,
or asset*
Validated
Yes (Y),
high
probability
(HP), No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
yes (Y),
no
(N) Principle
Context-specific
recommendation
Utility value:
Administrators must
see the value in
updating their current
safety plans to include
an active shooter plan.
HP Y Research supports the
notion that learners
must find value in what
they are expected to
learn (Eccles, 2006).
Eccles (2006) stated
that in order for
learners to find value in
any given task, it must
also align with their
internal goals and
beliefs.
Provide training to
administrators that
highlights how
updating their
safety plans aligns
with their
organizational goal
and that helps
them understand
that, in order for
students to
achieve, they must
first feel safe
within their
learning
environment.
Self-efficacy:
Administrators must
gain the appropriate
knowledge to feel
comfortable educating
staff on gun safety and
active shooters.
HP Y Research shows that in
order for learning goals
and objectives to be
achieved, motivational
influences must also be
taken into
consideration.
(Pintrich, 2003).
Pintrich (2003) asserted
that, in order for
learning to truly
flourish, one must
analyze the social-
cognitive models and
constructs that motivate
learners to learn.
Pajares (2006) further
supported this analysis
of motivation and
claimed that learners
Law enforcement
may provide
training in crisis
response. This
way,
administrators can
work with them to
acquire the
appropriate
knowledge to
educate other
members within
their organization.
In addition to this,
school
administrators will
feel better prepared
in an emergency
situation.
Active Shooter
69
must have a heightened
sense of self-efficacy in
order to feel as if their
actions will produce
desired outcomes.
Utility value. Administrators must see the value in updating their current safety plans to
include a focus on active shooters. Eccles (2006) found that for learners to find value in any
given task, the task must align with their internal goals and beliefs. This suggests that training
should be provided to administrators highlighting how updating their safety plan is aligned with
their organizational goals. In addition, all administrators interviewed recommended the
organization provide various staff development opportunities that outline the various components
of an active shooter plan and how it helps create a safe and secure learning environment for all
students.
Eccles (2006) stated that learners must find value in what they are expected to learn
Therefore, administrators must understand that for students to achieve, they must first feel safe
within their learning environment (Borum et al., 2010). Administrators must understand how
safety is aligned with overall student achievement, and they must know how to identify the
factors associated with the likelihood of an attack. Ding et al. (2009) stated that mental health
plays a pivotal role in students’ cognitive processes and that suffering through the trauma of a
violent event can have a negative effect on student achievement. Gietz and McIntosh (2014) also
highlighted the fact that schools that do not have a comprehensive safety plan in place dedicate
50% of classroom time to addressing disruptive behaviors, rather than to actual academic
Active Shooter
70
instruction. Research showed that if school leaders want to promote academic success, they
must create learning environments in which students feel safe and comfortable working together.
Self-efficacy. Administrators must gain the appropriate knowledge to feel comfortable
educating staff on gun safety and active shooters. Pajares (2006) claimed that learners must have
a heightened sense of self-efficacy in order to feel as if their actions will produce desired
outcomes. This suggests that administrators should familiarize themselves with the various
components involved in active shooter prevention, intervention, and crisis management.
Organizations should work with law enforcement to provide training so that they will feel better
prepared to handle emergency situations.
Pintrich (2003) asserted that for learning to truly flourish, one must analyze the social-
cognitive models and constructs that motivate learners to learn. Pajares (2006) stated that
learners must feel confident in the learning process and must be willing to participate in self-
regulation in regard to personal growth. The FBI (2013) stated that law enforcement should be
consulted on a regular basis and should assist school administrators with identifying specific risk
factors for violence in schools. Bandura (1977) additionally stated that an important role in
building self-efficacy is to provide learners with mastery experiences. Therefore, administrators
should work with local law enforcement to participate in simulated active shooter trainings.
Organization Recommendations
The organizational influences in Table 7 represent the complete list of assumed
organizational influences and their probability of being validated based on the most frequently
mentioned organizational influences for achieving the stakeholders’ goal during informal
interviews and supported by the literature review and the review of organization and culture
theory. For change to be sustainable, leaders must foster a climate and culture that supports
Active Shooter
71
change (Schneider et al., 1996). Schneider et al. (1996) asserted that for change to occur,
cultural models and settings must be clearly aligned with the mission and goal of the
organization and stakeholders must play an active role in the change process.
As such, as indicated in Table 7, some organizational influences have a high probability
of being validated and have a high priority for achieving the stakeholders’ goal. Table 7 also
shows the recommendations for these influences based on theoretical principles.
Table 7
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed organizational
influence:
Validated
yes (V),
high
probability
(HP), no
(N)
Priority
(Y, N)
Principle
Context-specific
recommendation
Cultural model
influence:
There is a general lack
of knowledge in regard
to the cultural
components necessary
for creating an
effective active shooter
safety plan.
HP Y Learning tasks that are
similar to those that are
common to the
individual’s familiar
cultural settings will
promote learning and
transfer (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001).
Conduct team
meetings with staff
to develop the
culture, integrating
the new safety
plan. Meetings
will define what
needs to change
and will identify
gaps.
Cultural model setting:
School leaders are not
aware of the necessary
HP Y Social interaction,
cooperative learning,
and cognitive
Local law
enforcement
should work with
Active Shooter
72
resources needed for
active shooter
prevention/preparedness
.
apprenticeships (such
as reciprocal teaching)
facilitate construction
of new knowledge
(Scott & Palincsar,
2006).
school leaders to
clearly outline
resources needed
and to conduct a
threat assessment
of campuses.
Cultural models. There is a general lack of knowledge amongst administrators in regard
to the cultural components necessary to create an effective active shooter plan. Gallimore and
Goldenberg (2001) asserted that for learning to flourish, learning tasks must be similar to a
learner’s familiar cultural setting. This suggests that administrators should conduct team
meetings with staff to develop their culture and to train on how to integrate the new safety plan
within current cultural models. Staff meetings should identify gaps within the current structure
and highlight what needs to change in order to create a safer learning environment. Studies
showed that when designing an active shooter plan, administrators should begin by conducting a
threat assessment of their school campuses (Daniels et al., 2010).
As part of their threat assessment, administrators must familiarize themselves with their
site’s physical environment and the societal behaviors that foster a culture of violence
(Duplechain & Morris, 2014). Krathwol (2001) stated that learners must be provided with the
basic factual knowledge to proceed and that they must immerse themselves in the conceptual,
Active Shooter
73
procedural, and metacognitive knowledge necessary to truly understand, apply, and execute their
organizational goals. For administrators to meet their organizational goals, they must
continuously meet with internal and external stakeholders to update their safety plan and
strategize on how to best prevent an active shooter from gaining access to their campus.
Cultural settings. School leaders are not aware of the resources needed for active
shooter prevention. Scott and Palinscar (2006) stated that social interaction, cooperative
learning, and cognitive apprenticeships (such as reciprocal teaching) facilitate construction of
new knowledge. For school leaders to effectively implement an active shooter plan, they must
work with local law enforcement to identify the necessary resources that support full
implementation. School leaders must collaborate with law enforcement to conduct a threat
assessment of their campuses and include threat assessment reviews in all safety-related
trainings.
Data collected from participants interviewed and documents analyzed, stressed how
preventing school violence must be a multidisciplinary endeavor in which all stakeholders from
within the organization collaborate with one another to identity what is needed to develop a
systematic plan geared toward violence prevention, intervention, and crisis management (Keehn
& Boyle, 2015). Snell and Volokh (2005) stressed that it is important for school leaders to
integrate law enforcement into disciplinary management systems within the educational system.
Snell and Volokh (2005) also recommended that school leaders reach out to surrounding
agencies to assist with providing resources to both students and staff in the event of an
emergency.
Active Shooter
74
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The model that informed the implementation and evaluation plan for this study was the
New world Kirkpatrick model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), which is based on the original
Kirkpatrick four level model of evaluation (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). This model
suggests that evaluation plans focus on evaluating training programs on four levels. The first
level evaluates how participants felt about the training and whether they found the training to be
useful to their particular line of work. The second level of the Kirkpatrick model addresses
learning and evaluates what participants learned from the training. The third level of evaluation
analyzes the ability of participants to transfer what they learned into the workplace.
Kirkpatrick’s final level of evaluation looks at the overall effectiveness of the training by
focusing on results after implementation.
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations
The purpose of this project was to provide knowledge to school leaders who want to
implement an active shooter plan as part of their comprehensive safety plan. KUSD’s
organizational goal was to develop a comprehensive safety plan that collaborated with local
agencies to include a section on active shooters and to annually train 100% of their school
administrators on the new safety plan. Their organizational goal was clearly aligned with their
mission to provide a quality education to students in a secure and supportive environment. This
project examined the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences that
assisted school leaders with implementing an effective active shooter plan. The proposed
solution, which includes a comprehensive training program, related on-the-job supports, and an
improved relationship with law enforcement, should produce the desired outcome:
Active Shooter
75
implementation of an effective active shooter plan geared toward prevention, intervention, and
crisis management.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Table 8 shows the outcomes, metrics, and methods for both external and internal
outcomes for KUSD. If the internal outcomes are met as expected as a result of the training and
organizational implementation of KUSD’s active shooter plan, then the external outcomes should
also be realized.
Table 8
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External outcomes
1. Increase awareness of
the public (community
members, parents, and
visitors) about the new
safety plan.
The number of communication
methods utilized to make
external stakeholders aware of
the new active shooter plan.
Solicit data from the community
via surveys to see how to best
communicate the new safety
plan.
2. Increase overall
school safety.
The number of reported fights,
expulsions, and suspensions.
Solicit quarterly data from
students and staff via a survey,
keep track of
suspension/expulsion numbers,
and compare results of Healthy
Kids Survey annually.
3. Improve relationships
with law enforcement.
3a. The number of safety
trainings that include law
enforcement.
3a. Quarterly check in with
lieutenant and sergeant directly
in charge of school resource
officers.
3b. The increase in funding for
law enforcement to be present at
all major school events (dances,
athletic activities, graduation)
3b. Compare budget strands to
note where an allocation of
funds may come from.
3c. The increase in funding for
the district’s Memorandum of
Understanding to include sub
coverage for all school resource
officers when they are out sick.
3c. Compare funding levels with
new MOU.
Active Shooter
76
3d. The number of times the
school calendar of
events/activities is shared with
local law enforcement.
3d. Monthly check in with
lieutenant and sergeant directly
in charge of school safety.
Internal outcomes
4. Increase time to train
all staff on the new
active shooter safety
plan.
The number of days required
throughout the school year for
safety training.
Aggregate data from safety team
leads (self-report collected via
survey)
5. Increase accuracy in
regard to drills aimed
toward active shooter
prevention.
The number of errors made by
teachers and staff in simulated
drills and trainings.
Aggregate data from safety team
leads and administrators (self-
report and supervisor
confirmation; collected via
checklist and survey)
6. Increase employee
confidence with new
active shooter plan.
6a. KUSD results on key
questions.
6a. Compare annual survey
results.
6b. Positive/negative feedback
from supervisors.
6b. Set aside regular times for
1:1 conversations (“pull up a
chair”) between staff and
administrators.
Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. The stakeholders of focus were school administrators, and the goal
was implementation of an active shooter plan geared toward active shooter prevention,
intervention, and crisis management. The first critical behavior was that school leaders must
effectively conduct a threat assessment of their campuses to identify areas of need in regard to
safety. The second critical behavior was that school leaders work with local law enforcement to
address the areas of need and to develop a comprehensive safety plan with a focus on active
shooters. The third critical behavior was that they must train all stakeholders on the plan and
must update their safety plans on a continuous basis. The specific metrics, methods, and timing
for each of these outcome behaviors appears in Table 9.
Active Shooter
77
Table 9
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Administrators
Critical behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1. School leaders
must conduct a
threat assessment
of their campuses.
The number of items
or resources that need
to be taken into
consideration to
improve school safety.
School leaders must
conduct a threat
assessment of their
campuses, utilizing a
checklist created by law
enforcement.
1. At the beginning
of every school
year.
2. School leaders
must collaborate
with local law
enforcement in
creation of their
active shooter
plan.
The number of
suggestions made by
law enforcement to
improve school safety.
2a. School leaders shall
work with law
enforcement to address
critical areas of need.
School leaders shall
seek feedback from law
enforcement on a
monthly basis.
2a. During first
week of school.
Thereafter, monthly
through meetings
and safety trainings
provided to staff
every other month.
3. School leaders
must train all
stakeholders on
the active shooter
plan and must
update the plan on
a yearly basis.
The number of staff
trained and the
number of changes
made from year to
year.
3a. Job aids provided on
a continuous basis and
safety trainings held
every other month.
3a. During first
week of school.
Thereafter, every
other month.
Required drivers. Staff requires the support of their direct supervisors and the organization to
reinforce what they learn in training and to encourage them to apply what they have learned to
the implementation of a school-wide active shooter plan. Rewards should be established for
achievement of performance goals to enhance the organizational support of staff. Table 10
shows the recommended drivers to support critical behaviors of school leaders.
Active Shooter
78
Table 10
Required Drivers to Support Administrators’ Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical behaviors supported
(as identified in Table 9).
Reinforcing
Job aid including glossary of
terms related to active
shooters.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Job aid including checklist
highlighting protocols and
procedures to follow in an
active shooter situation.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Staff meeting/training on
active shooter plan.
Every other month 1, 2, 3
Use social media to reinforce
communication of active
shooter plan to both internal
and external stakeholder
groups.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Meetings with local law
enforcement to address
safety needs.
Monthly 1, 2, 3
Encouraging
Collaboration and peer
modeling during team
meetings.
Weekly 1, 2, 3
Feedback and coaching from
law enforcement.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Rewarding
Performance incentive when
error rate decreases in active
shooter drills/simulations.
Quarterly 1, 2, 3
Public acknowledgement,
such as a mention at staff and
district meetings, when team
performance hits a
benchmark
Quarterly 1, 2, 3
Monitoring
Administrators can create
opportunities at all-hands
meetings to share success
stories
Quarterly 1, 2, 3
Active Shooter
79
Administrators can ask staff
to self-report their
confidence and self-efficacy
in job-related tasks
One month after training 1, 2, 3
Administrators can assess the
performance of the learner.
Frequent, quick checks can
help the organization
monitor progress and make
adjustments if results do not
match expectations at that
time
Monthly 1, 2, 3
Organizational Support. To support administrators’ critical behaviors, the organization
will provide opportunities for professional development focused on active shooter preparedness
and response. Trainings will highlight protocols and procedures in an active shooter plan and
will create opportunities for stakeholders to update their safety plan on a continuous basis.
Trainings will be provided via staff meetings, release time, in professional learning communities,
and via the Web. The organization will achieve the desired result of full implementation by
ensuring all levels of the organization are properly trained in active shooter response.
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. Following completion of the recommended solutions, most notably the
inclusion of an active shooter response in their safety plan, the stakeholders will be able to do the
following:
1. Recognize the basic components associated with an active shooter plan. (D)
(curriculum/material piece, added to program piece)
2. Apply the appropriate knowledge to educate other members within their organization.
(P)
3. Apply knowledge related to gun safety and crime prevention. (P)
Active Shooter
80
4. Conduct a threat assessment of their school campus, utilizing a checklist provided by
law enforcement. (P)
5. Identify gaps in their current safety plan. (P)
6. Apply knowledge to modify their current protocols and procedures to include a focus
on an active shooter. (P)
7. Update their safety plan on a continuous basis. (P)
8. Create an appropriate timeline for different review processes. (P)
9. Indicate confidence that they can implement protocols and procedures necessary for
school-wide implementation of an active shooter plan. (Confidence)
10. Value how feeling better prepared in an emergency situation will assist with meeting
their organizational goal. (Value)
11. Value the planning and monitoring of their work. (Value)
Program. The learning goals listed in the previous section will be achieved by
administrators working closely with law enforcement to conduct an initial threat assessment of
their campus to identify gaps in their current safety plan and to develop the necessary steps to
address those gaps. Administrators must also work with law enforcement to familiarize
themselves with current crime trends and to take note of the specific types of behaviors that
perpetuate violence. Once this is done, administrators will work with their local police
department to develop school-wide safety trainings with a focus on active shooters.
Administrators and staff will find value in the trainings because each training will specifically
highlight how implementation of the new safety plan is clearly aligned with their organizational
goal of providing all students with a safe and secure learning environment.
Active Shooter
81
Administrators will work with law enforcement to provide job aids listing the necessary
protocols and procedures to follow in the event of an active shooter situation. All staff will be
provided with job aids on a continuous basis and will attend trainings on the new safety plan
every other month. In addition to this, administrators will work with law enforcement to develop
a protocol for staff to report incidents of violence and will integrate simulated active shooter
drills within their safety plan. Law enforcement will assist with all drills, and administrators will
meet with the lieutenant over the school resources officers on a monthly basis to provide him or
her with a list of calendar activities in which to encourage police presence. The site budget will
also be evaluated in regard to allocation of funding for resources specifically focused on active
shooter prevention, intervention, and crisis management.
Components of learning. Demonstrating declarative knowledge is often necessary as a
precursor to applying the knowledge to solve problems. Thus, it is important to evaluate
learning for both declarative and procedural knowledge. It is also important that learners value
the training as a prerequisite to using their newly learned knowledge and skills on the job.
However, they must also be confident that they can succeed in applying their knowledge and
skills and be committed to using them on the job. As such, Table 11 lists the evaluation methods
and timing for these components of learning.
Table 11
Components of Learning for the Program.
Method(s) or activity(ies) Timing
Declarative knowledge: “I know it.”
Knowledge checks (of safety curriculum)
through the use of surveys.
Surveys administered to staff at the
conclusion of each safety training (every
other month).
Knowledge checks through discussions, “pair,
think, share,” and other individual/group
activities.
Periodically during the in-person
workshops and documented via observation
notes.
Active Shooter
82
Procedural skills: “I can do it right now.”
During the simulated drills provided by law
enforcement.
Six times within the school year.
Demonstration in groups and individually of
using the job aids to successfully perform the
skills.
During the workshops.
Quality of the feedback from peers during
group sharing
During the workshops.
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment
survey asking participants about their level of
proficiency before and after the training.
At the end of the workshop.
Attitude: “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Instructor’s observation of participants’
statements and actions demonstrating that they
see the benefit of what they are being asked to
do on the job.
During the workshop.
Discussions of the value of what they are being
asked to do on the job and how it is aligned
with their organizational goal.
During the workshop.
Confidence: “I think I can do it on the job.”
Survey items using scaled items Following each safety training.
Discussions following practice and feedback.
During the workshop/training.
Commitment: “I will do it on the job.”
Discussions following practice and feedback.
During the workshops/trainings.
Create an individual action plan.
During the workshop.
Accuracy assessment conducted by
administrators and law enforcement after each
simulation/drill.
After each simulation/drill.
Level 1: Reaction
Upon completion of each training, it is important for participants to provide feedback on
the training in regard to engagement, relevance, and customer satisfaction. Table 12 lists the
methods used to evaluate reactions to the program.
Active Shooter
83
Table 12
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program.
Method(s) or tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Data analytics in the learning management
system
Ongoing during asynchronous portion of
the safety training
Completion of online modules/lessons/units Ongoing during asynchronous portion of
the course.
Observation by instructor/facilitator During the workshops/trainings
Attendance During the workshops/trainings
Course evaluation Two weeks after each training
Relevance
Brief pulse-check with participants via survey
(online) and discussion (ongoing)
After every training/workshop
Course evaluation Two weeks after each training
Customer satisfaction
Brief pulse-check with participants via survey
(online) and discussion (ongoing)
After every module/lesson/unit and the
workshop
Course evaluation Two weeks after each training/workshop
Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. During the asynchronous
portion of the course, data will be collected from participants about the start, duration, and
completion of modules. The data will indicate their engagement with the course material.
Administrators will also administer brief surveys after each module and request that participants
indicate the relevance of the material to their job performance and their overall satisfaction with
the content and delivery of both the in-person workshops and online modules.
For Level 1, during the in-person workshop, the instructor will conduct periodic brief
pulse-checks by asking the participants about the relevance of the content to their work and the
organization, delivery, and learning environment. Level 2 will include checks for understanding
through the use of simulated active shooter drills. In addition to this, after program
Active Shooter
84
implementation, administrators will utilize a checklist to conduct a threat assessment of their
campus.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. Approximately six weeks
after the implementation of the training, and then again after 15 weeks, leadership will
administer a survey containing open and scaled items to measure the participants’ perspectives
and satisfaction and the perceived relevance of the training (Level 1); their confidence in and
value of applying their training (Level 2); the application of the active shooter training campus-
wide (Level 3); and the extent to which their performance in active shooter drills has become
more accurate and timely (Level 4).
Data Analysis and Reporting
The Level 4 goal of stakeholders is measured by the accuracy and speed with which staff
are able to effectively complete an active shooter drill. After full implementation and training
on the active shooter plan, administrators will track the number of errors made on the active
shooter checklist and will utilize staff meetings to report findings/results to staff. For Level 3
(Behavior), administrators will complete a full threat assessment of their campuses and will
survey whether staff feel they have the necessary resources to fully implement the new plan. For
level 2 (Learning), administrators will utilize the results from each of the surveys collected post
training to evaluate whether all stakeholders from within the organization comprehend all
components of the plan. For Level 1 (Reaction), administrators will utilize the results from each
survey collected post training to evaluate whether all stakeholders from within the organization
truly find value in the plan and whether they clearly understand how the new safety plan helps
them achieve their organizational goal. All cumulative results will be shared with the staff at the
end of the year staff meeting.
Active Shooter
85
Figure 2. Evaluation
After Completion of All Active Shooter Trainings/Surveys
(Level 1 Goal= Value of Active Shooter Plan, Level 2 Goal= Comprehension of
Active Shooter Plan, Level 3 Goal= Threat Assessment, Level 4 Goal= Accuracy of Active
Shooter Drill.
Summary
The New World Kirkpatrick Model was utilized to create an effective evaluation of
recommendations, found throughout the data and literature review, in relation to implementation
of a school-wide active shooter plan. The Kirkpatrick Four Level Model was used to evaluate
the suggested recommendations for addressing knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that might assist administrators in meeting their organizational goal and in creating a
safe and secure learning environment for all students. In addition, suggestions were made on
Active Shooter
86
how to evaluate future programs in relation to engagement, comprehension, value, and overall
satisfaction as they relate to school-wide implementation of an active shooter plan geared toward
prevention, intervention, and crisis management.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study used a qualitative case study approach that included document analysis and
interviews. As the principal researcher, I made sure to erase all identifiable information from
participant interviews. Although participants provided deep insight into the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences that assisted with the creation and implementation of
an award-winning active shooter plan, the study was limited in that it only documented the
perspectives of one stakeholder group. Administrators were the only participants interviewed in
the study, and those who were selected were part of the District Safety Committee. The study
only included site administrators. Including district managers in the study would have assisted
with identifying the organizational resources necessary for district-wide implementation of a
comprehensive safety plan. For instance, district management could have provided insight into
the fiscal impact of providing the necessary resources geared toward active shooter prevention
and crisis response.
Future Research
After analyzing the limitations and delimitations of the study, several recommendations
for future study emerged. All participants interviewed stressed the importance of including all
stakeholders in design of an active shooter plan. Therefore, the first recommendation is to
conduct a district-wide study on implementing a comprehensive active shooter plan that includes
the perspectives of parents, students, teachers, and staff. This study only highlighted the
perspectives of administrators involved in creating the active shooter response plan. Although
Active Shooter
87
all documents analyzed listed the important role stakeholders play within an active shooter
response plan, gaining the perspectives of others within the organization would have provided
insight as to whether all stakeholders truly felt safe and prepared in the event of an active shooter
situation. This research would also allow for an in-depth analysis of the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational influences that impact all levels of the organization in relation to active
shooter preparedness. For example, including the perspectives of all stakeholders involved
would provide more knowledge on what is necessary to address the safety needs of the
surrounding community in relation to each individual school site.
A second recommendation for future research is to evaluate the administrative
differences that arise when implementing an active shooter plan at the elementary, middle
school, and high school level. The findings revealed that although administrators from all levels
were interviewed for this study, the research questions did not address whether there were any
differences in implementation strategies that were specific to particular grade levels. Although
common themes emerged throughout each interview, differences in relation to grade level were
also noted. For example, a secondary institution with a larger school site might need to allocate
more money to secure axillary facilities such as the football field, gym, and student parking lot.
In addition, a high school staff is often much larger than that of an elementary staff and would
require more funding for trainings. Therefore, future research might consider how administrators
can develop their own unique active shooter plans based upon the grade level of students they
service.
Conclusion
At KUSD and other districts across the nation, active shooter prevention and crisis
response is an integral component of student safety. This study highlighted KUSD as a model
Active Shooter
88
for school safety and active shooter preparedness, as well as listed the specific components
which afforded them national recognition from the School Safety Advocacy Council. In
addition, KUSD was selected as a model other districts can learn from, as data clearly
demonstrates how their active shooter plan has assisted with their organizational goal of creating
a safe and secure learning environment at each of their school sites. Administrators were
selected as the primary stakeholders in this research because they are responsible for monitoring
and updating their school safety plans on an annual basis. Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis
model was utilized to present data in relation to the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences administrators must consider when creating and implementing their own active
shooter plans. In alignment with the framework, data revealed that for administrators to have an
effective active shooter plan, they must clearly demonstrate how creating a safe environment
assists with meeting their organizational goals. For example, research stated that an important
component of student achievement is ensuring that students feel safe within their learning
environment (Borum et al., 2010). Therefore, in order for educational institutions to bolster
student achievement, they must make student safety a top priority.
The data from this study stressed the importance of administrators taking a
multidisciplinary approach when creating their own active shooter plans to ensure all
stakeholders play an active role in the process and assist with creating the safest campus
possible. In addition, administrators must work closely with law enforcement to design their
plans because they are experts in the field of safety and are up to date with the latest crime trends
and behaviors that lead to violence. Although no plan is fool proof, having systems in place to
reduce the number of opportunities an intruder has to gain access to a school campus will
undeniably decrease the risk of an attack. In addition, should an active shooter situation arise,
Active Shooter
89
having protocols in place can significantly reduce the loss of life. The main goal of all
educational institutions is to provide students with an opportunity to learn. Creating and
implementing a comprehensive safety plan will allow districts to increase their students’ feelings
of safety and will positively impact student achievement.
Active Shooter
90
References
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.
Barker, G. G., & Yoder, M. E. (2012). The Virginia Tech shootings: Implications for crisis
communication in educational settings. Journal of School Public Relations, 33(2), 78–
101.
Beland, L., & Kim, D. (2016). The effect of high school shootings on schools and student
performance. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 38(1), 113–126.
Borum, R., Cornell, D. G., Modzeleski, W., & Jimerson, S. R. (2010). What can be done about
school shootings? A review of the evidence. Educational Researcher, 39(1), 27–37.
Boyd, K. S. (2004, August). The association between student perceptions of safety and academic
achievement: The mediating effects of absenteeism. Paper presented at the annual meeting
of the American Sociological Association, San Francisco, CA.
Clark, R. E. (2012, May 24). Automated knowledge [video file]. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSK63nqEbLQ&feature=youtu.be
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Atlanta, GA: CEP Press.
Crepeau-Hobson, F., Sievering, K. S., Armstrong, C., & Stonis, J. (2012). A coordinated mental
health crisis response: Lessons learned from three Colorado school shootings. Journal of
School Violence, 11(3), 207–225.
Daniels, J. A., Volungis, A., Pshenishny, E., Gandhi, P., Winkler, A., Cramer, D. P., & Bradley,
M. C. (2010). A qualitative investigation of averted school shooting
rampages. Counseling Psychologist, 38(1), 69–95.
Ding, W., Lehrer, S. F., Rosenquist, J. N., & Audrain- McGovern, J. (2009). The impact of poor
health on academic performance: New evidence using genetic markers. Journal of Health
Economics, 28, 578–597.
DeLeon, A. P. (2012). A perverse kind of sense: Urban spaces, ghetto places and the discourse of
school shootings. Urban Review: Issues and Ideas in Public Education, 44(1), 152–169.
Duplechain, R., & Morris, R. (2014). School violence: Reported school shootings and making
schools safer. Education, 135(2), 145–150.
Active Shooter
91
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/?
Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2013, November). Critical incident response group, active
shooter event/mass casualty events. Retrieved from http://www.fbi. gov/about-
us/cirg/active-shooter-and-mass-casualty-incidents [Crystal: Please check this reference.
I couldn’t make the URL work or find the title via Google.]
Gray, L., & Lewis, L. (2015). Public school safety and discipline: 2013-14 (NCES 2015-
051). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Gietz, C., & McIntosh, K. (2014). Relations between student perceptions of their school
environment and academic achievement. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 29(3),
161–176.
Guskey, A. (2013). A test of the spirit: The Duquesne University shootings. Marketing
Education Review, 23(2), 179–189. [Crystal: I didn’t see this text in your paper. Should it
be added somewhere, or should this entry be deleted?]
Hanson, J. (2014). Behavioral problems after early life stress: Contributions of the hippocampus
and amygdala. Biological Psychiatry, 77, 314–323.
Hong, J. S., Cho, H., & Lee, A. S. (2010). Revisiting the Virginia Tech shootings: An ecological
systems analysis. Journal of Loss And Trauma, 15(6), 561–575.
Interdisciplinary Group on Preventing School and Community Violence. (2013). December 2012
Connecticut school shooting position statement. Journal of School Violence, 12(2), 119–
133. [Crystal: I didn’t see this text in your paper. Should it be added somewhere, or
should this be deleted from your Reference section?]
Martin, J. (2013). The politics of fear. Child & Youth Services, 34(1), 5–8.
Mitchell, M. L., & Brendtro, L. K. (2013). Victories over violence: The quest for safe schools
and communities. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 22(3), 5–11.
Modzeleski, W. (1996). Creating safe schools: Roles and challenges, a federal
perspective. Education and Urban Society, 28(4), 412–423.
Mongan, P., & Walker, R. (2012). The road to hell is paved with good intentions: A historical,
theoretical, and legal analysis of zero-tolerance weapons policies in American
schools. Preventing School Failure, 56(4), 232–240.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/.
Active Shooter
92
Robers, S., Zhang, A., Morgan, R. E., & Musu-Gillette, L. (2015). Indicators of school crime
and safety: 2014 (NCES 2015-072/NCJ 248036). Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Statistics.
Sallee, M. W. (2005). A tragedy requires focus, not finger pointing. Reclaiming Children and
Youth: The Journal of Strength-Based Interventions, 14(2), 71.
Schiller, J. (2013). School shootings and critical pedagogy. Educational Forum, 77(2), 100–110.
[Crystal: I didn’t see this text in your paper. Should it be added somewhere, or should this
entry be deleted?]
Shapiro, H. (2015). When the exception is the rule: School shootings, bare life, and the sovereign
self. Educational Theory, 65(4), 423–440.
Springhall, J. (1999). Violent media, guns and moral panics: The Columbine High School
massacre, 20 April 1999. Paedagogica Historica, 35(3), 621–641.
Stader, D. L. (2004). Zero tolerance as public policy: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Clearing
House, 78(2), 62.
Swezey, J. A., & Thorp, K. A. (2010). A school shooting plot foiled. Journal of Research On
Christian Education, 19(3), 286–312.
Thompson, A., Price, J. H., Mrdjenovich, A. J., & Khubchandani, J. (2009). Reducing firearm-
related violence on college campuses--Police chiefs' perceptions and practices. Journal of
American College Health, 58(3), 247–254.
U.S. Department of Education. (2013, June). Developing emergency operations plans for
schools. Retrieved from https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/rems-k-12-guide-
508.pdf/view
Warnick, B. R., Johnson, B. A., & Rocha, S. (2010). Tragedy and the meaning of school
shootings. Educational Theory,60(3), 371–390.
Woods S., Wolke D. (2004). Direct and relational bullying among primary school children and
academic achievement. Journal of School Psychology, 42, 135–155. [Crystal: I didn’t
see this text in your paper. Should it be added somewhere, or should this entry be
deleted?]
Active Shooter
93
APPENDIX A
University of Southern California
(Rossier School of Education)
INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
(Promising Practice Model: Creation and Implementation of a Comprehensive Active
Shooter/Safety Plan
You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Crystal Berrellez and Dr.
Kathy Stowe, at the University of Southern California, because you are an administrator within
the organization of study. Your participation is voluntary. You should read the information
below and ask questions about anything you do not understand before deciding whether to
participate. Please take as much time as you need to read the consent form. You may also decide
to discuss participation with your family or friends. If you decide to participate, you will be
asked to sign this form. You will be given a copy of this form.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to highlight your district’s active shooter plan and how it relates to a
Promising Practice Model that other districts might refer to when updating their current safety
plans.
STUDY PROCEDURES
If you volunteer to participate in this study, you will be asked a series of questions that relate to
your safety plan and the protocols and procedures you have in place for full implementation of
the plan. Your interview will be audio recorded, and you will be provided the transcripts of your
interview to check for accuracy. In addition to this, if you do not want to be recorded, you may
still participate in the study. The approximate time for each interview is about 60 minutes.
POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
No anticipated risks
POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
No anticipated benefits
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will not be paid for participating in this research study.
Active Shooter
94
CONFIDENTIALITY
We will keep your records for this study confidential as far as permitted by law. However, if we
are required to do so by law, we will disclose confidential information about you. The members
of the research team, the funding agency, and the University of Southern California’s Human
Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors
research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
The data will be stored on my laptop and recorder for a minimum of 3 years. You will have the
right to review/edit the audio recordings or transcripts.
PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
Your participation is voluntary. Your refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of
benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. You may withdraw your consent at any time and
discontinue participation without penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights, or
remedies because of your participation in this research study.
INVESTIGATOR’S CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact the principal
investigator, Crystal Berrellez, at berrelle@usc.edu or Dissertation Advisor Kathy Stowe at
kstowe@usc.edu.
RIGHTS OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT – IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the
research in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone
independent of the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board
(UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or
upirb@usc.edu
SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT
I have read the information provided above. I have been given a chance to ask questions. My
questions have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this study. I have
been given a copy of this form.
AUDIO/VIDEO/PHOTOGRAPHS
□ I agree to be audio recorded
□ I do not want to be audio recorded
Name of Participant
Signature of Participant Date
Active Shooter
95
SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR
I have explained the research to the participant and answered all of his/her questions. I believe
that he/she understands the information described in this document and freely consents to
participate.
Crystal Berrellez
Signature of Person Obtaining Consent Date
Active Shooter
96
APPENDIX B
Interview Protocol
1. What was your particular role in the development of the new safety plan?
2. What are the top 5 components one must consider when creating an effective safety plan?
3. What are the criteria that you used to develop an active shooter plan?
4. Can you walk me through some of the important steps one must take when developing an
active shooter plan?
5. Can you describe the processes you have in place for active shooter prevention?
6. How about intervention?
7. What protocols do you have in place for overall crisis management in the event of an active
shooter situation? (What would you do? What are the specific roles of your staff?)
8. What are the organizational influences that might prevent other administrators from
implementing an active shooter plan school-wide?
9. What type of organizational resources do you currently have in place to support your plan?
10. What are the motivational influences administrators should address when implementing
the plan school-wide?
11. How did implementing an active shooter plan help you grow professionally?
12. How did this knowledge assist with your development as an educator?
13. What types of knowledge do school leaders need in order to create an active shooter plan
geared toward prevention, intervention, and crisis management?
14. How might other school leaders find value (motivation) in creating a new safety plan with a
focus on active shooters?
Active Shooter
97
APPENDIX C
Active Shooter Professional Development
Level 1 Survey Reaction
Survey
Rate:
Strongly disagree Somewhat
disagree
Somewhat agree Agree Strongly agree
1 2 3 4 5
Engagement
1. The handouts and materials provided were useful in highlighting the key components of
an active shooter plan.
2. I was comfortable with the pace of the training.
Strongly disagree Somewhat
disagree
Somewhat agree Agree Strongly agree
1 2 3 4 5
Relevance
1. The information provided in the training is relevant to my job.
2. I understand why this safety training was offered.
Strongly disagree Somewhat
disagree
Somewhat agree Agree Strongly agree
1 2 3 4 5
Customer Satisfaction
1. I would recommend this training to other coworkers.
Active Shooter
98
2. I feel that this safety training was worthwhile.
Strongly disagree Somewhat
disagree
Somewhat agree Agree Strongly agree
1 2 3 4 5
Level 2 Survey Learning
Declarative Knowledge
1. List the 5 rules of firearm safety.
Procedural Knowledge
1. List the protocols involved in the event of an active shooter.
Attitude
1. Describe the value of integrating an active shooter plan within the school-wide safety
plan.
Confident (agree/disagree)
1. I can list the components of the threat assessment checklist right now.
Commitment (agree/disagree)
1. I have been following all procedures listed in the active shooter plan.
Blended Level Survey 1, 2, 3, 4
Level 1 Reaction
1. My learning was enhanced by the instructor/facilitator.
2. The workshop held my interest.
Strongly disagree Somewhat
disagree
Somewhat agree Agree Strongly agree
1 2 3 4 5
Active Shooter
99
Level 2 Learning
1. It is clear why it was important for me to attend this safety training.
2. I believe this course’s content is important to creating a safe learning environment for
students.
Strongly disagree Somewhat
disagree
Somewhat agree Agree Strongly agree
1 2 3 4 5
Level 3 Behavior
1. My administrator and I determined how I would apply what I learned after training.
2. I have the necessary resources to apply what I learned successfully
Strongly disagree Somewhat
disagree
Somewhat agree Agree Strongly agree
1 2 3 4 5
Level 4 Results
1. This training has positively impacted this organization.
2. This training has positively impacted mission accomplishment.
Strongly disagree Somewhat
disagree
Somewhat agree Agree Strongly agree
1 2 3 4 5
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Implementation of strategies to address the fiscal impacts of declining enrollment on school resources: an evaluation study
PDF
Collaborative instructional practice for student achievement: an evaluation study
PDF
Assessing the meaning and value of traditional grading systems: teacher practices and perspectives
PDF
Implementing comprehensive succession planning: an improvement study
PDF
Supporting women business owners: the Inland Empire Women’s Business Center: an evaluation study
PDF
Overcoming the cultural teaching gap: an evaluative study of urban teachers’ implementation of culturally relevant instruction
PDF
A case study of promising practices mentoring K-12 chief technology officers
PDF
Participating in your own survival: a gap analysis study of the implementation of active shooter preparedness programs in mid-to-large size organizations
PDF
Physical activity interventions to reduce rates of sedentary behavior among university employees: a promising practice study
PDF
The Bridge Program and underrepresented Latino students: an evaluation study
PDF
Promising practices: developing principal leadership succession
PDF
Practices for assigning academic accommodations for students with specific learning disabilities
PDF
Promising practices: building the next generation of effective school principals
PDF
Linking shared governance and strategic planning processes: an innovation study
PDF
Quality literacy instruction in juvenile court schools: an evaluation study
PDF
Preventing excessive force incidents by improving police training: an evaluation study of a use-of-force training program
PDF
The use of differentiation in English medium instruction in Middle Eastern primary schools: a gap analysis
PDF
The role of international school teacher leaders in building leadership capacity within their teams
PDF
Implementing proactive safety strategies in place of reactive safety strategies at a manufacturing organization: an evaluation study
PDF
Teacher retention influences: an evaluation study
Asset Metadata
Creator
Berrellez, Crystal
(author)
Core Title
Creation and implementation of a comprehensive active shooter/safety plan: a promising practice study
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)
Publication Date
02/20/2018
Defense Date
12/19/2017
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
active shooter,finance officer,logistics officer,OAI-PMH Harvest,operations officer,planning/intelligence officer
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Stowe, Kathy (
committee chair
), Picus, Lawrence (
committee member
), Samkian, Artneth (
committee member
)
Creator Email
85cberrellez@gmail.com,berrelle@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-476148
Unique identifier
UC11265667
Identifier
etd-BerrellezC-6052.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-476148 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-BerrellezC-6052.pdf
Dmrecord
476148
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Berrellez, Crystal
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
active shooter
finance officer
logistics officer
operations officer
planning/intelligence officer