What Most School Systems Don’t Tell Parents About Reoccurring School Violence
Please follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Truth Social, Gettr, Twitter
Imagine this. You send your child to school one day thinking he/she will be safe and learn.
And then you hear about this on the news:
Immediately you begin to worry.
Or this at an elementary school:
Elementary school bullying caught on video, Inglewood mother demands answers | FOX 11 Los Angeles
Or this at a middle school:
Video captures Florida high school student’s head being slammed on concrete
Surely, you think that this couldn’t happen in your school district, particularly if you live in a more peaceful rural area. As pointed out in this article from the Easton Star Democrat in Talbot County, Maryland, you would be wrong:
Videos of Easton High School assault circulate online | Police and Fire | stardem.com
Sadly, these stories are not rare. In fact, there are more and more of them each month. In most cases, children are sent to the hospital with injuries. In others, children are murdered:
Clearly, Maryland has a problem:
How much of a problem is school violence throughout the United States?
From the National Center for Education Statistics:
- During the 2021–22 school year, about 857,500 violent incidents and 479,500 nonviolent incidents were recorded by U.S. public schools. Sixty-seven percent of schools reported having at least one violent incident, and 59 percent reported having at least one nonviolent incident.
- Sixty-one percent of schools reported at least one physical attack or fight without a weapon. Four percent of schools reported such an attack with a weapon.
- Three percent of all public schools (approximately 3,000 schools) reported that at least one hate crime occurred at school during the 2021–22 school year. The rate was higher in schools with over 1,000 students (8 percent) than in schools with lower enrollments (ranging from 2 to 4 percent).
- About 71 percent of high/secondary schools reported at least one incident of distribution, possession, or use of illegal drugs, a higher percentage than reported incidents of distribution, possession, or use of alcohol (34 percent) or prescription drugs (18 percent).
- Bullying at school at least once a week was reported by 28 percent of middle schools, compared to 15 percent of high/secondary schools and 10 percent of elementary schools. Similarly, cyberbullying at school or away from school at least once a week was reported by 37 percent of middle schools and 25 percent of high/secondary schools, compared to 6 percent of elementary schools.
- Sixty-five percent of all public schools reported having a threat assessment team. These teams were less common in rural schools (54 percent) than in town (64 percent), suburb (69 percent), and city schools (71 percent).
- Ninety percent of all public schools reported they increased social and emotional support for students in response to the coronavirus pandemic. Across regions, this percentage ranged from 88 percent of schools in the South to 94 percent of schools in the Northeast. The percentage was higher for schools in the Northeast than for schools in the Midwest and South.
- During the 2021–22 school year, 92 percent of public schools had a formal plan to prepare for and respond to multi-country or worldwide pandemic disease. Schools had plans describing the procedures to be performed in various other crisis scenarios as well. Some of the most commonly reported plans were for active shooters (96 percent), natural disasters (96 percent), suicide threats or incidents (94 percent), and bomb threats (92 percent).
- About 72 percent of charter schools reported involving students in restorative practices. This was higher than the percentage for traditional public schools (58 percent).
- Schools were asked about the extent to which certain factors limited their efforts to reduce or prevent crime. The two factors reported most often as limiting these efforts “in a major way” were lack of or inadequate alternative placements or programs for disruptive students (30 percent) and inadequate funding (27 percent). Schools were also asked about the extent to which certain factors limited their efforts to provide mental health services to students. The two factors reported most often as limiting these efforts “in a major way” were inadequate access to licensed mental health professionals and inadequate funding (39 percent each).
- Schools reported on the different types of security staff that were present at school at least once a week. This included School Resource Officers (SROs), which are sworn law enforcement officers with arrest authority, who have specialized training and are assigned to work in collaboration with school organizations, as well as other sworn law enforcement officers who are not SROs and other security officers or security personnel that are not sworn law enforcement. About 46 percent of traditional public schools had an SRO present at school at least once a week. This was higher than the percentage of charter schools (18 percent). In contrast, a higher percentage of charter schools reported having security officers or security personnel (35 percent) compared to traditional public schools (25 percent).
- A lower percentage of schools located in cities (30 percent) reported that one or more sworn law enforcement officers (including School Resource Officers) routinely carried a firearm while at school during the 2021–22 school year than schools located in suburbs (45 percent), towns (54 percent), and rural areas (55 percent).
- During the 2021–22 school year, 49 percent of all schools provided diagnostic mental health assessments to evaluate students for mental health disorders. Thirty-eight percent of all schools provided treatment to students for mental health disorders. Crime, Violence, Discipline, and Safety in U.S. Public Schools: Findings From the School Survey on Crime and Safety: 2021-22 | IES
And that was in 2021-2022.
With those numbers, one would think that many states would have schools that are labeled as “persistently dangerous.” That would be incorrect. During the 2023-24 school year, only five states reported identifying persistently dangerous schools, with one state accounting for 15 of the 25 schools reported nationwide, according to the Education Department. And not a single school was labeled persistently dangerous in the 2021-22 school year. This past year, no Maryland school was labeled “persistently dangerous.” Meanwhile, public school districts reported through the Civil Rights Data Collection nearly 1.2 million violent offenses that school year.
From that report:
Public school districts reported approximately 1.2 million offenses. These reported offenses
occurred in school buildings or during school-sponsored events.
- Physical attack without a weapon and threats of physical attack without a weapon accounted
for the vast majority of all incidents – 93%. - Public schools reported over 19,000 incidents of rape or attempted rape and sexual assault
(other than rape). Of those incidents, approximately 2% were reported to have been committed
by a school staff member. New Data Element - Approximately 425 schools (<1%) reported at least one incident involving a school-related
shooting, and about 130 schools (<1%) reported at least one school-related homicide involving
a student, faculty member, or staff member.
Link to report: 2020-21 Civil Rights Data Collection A First Look: Students’ Access to Educational Opportunities in U.S. Public Schools
Maryland schools reported a 19% increase in attacks, threats and fights in 2024.
The designation of a school as “persistently dangerous” would give parents an option to place their child in another public school or a charter school under Section 8532 of the Unsafe School Choice Option provision of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. The option was also part of the 2002 NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT.
Here is what that provision says:
Unsafe school choice policy:
FROM ESEA: Each State receiving funds under this chapter shall establish and implement a statewide policy requiring that a student attending a persistently dangerous public elementary school or secondary school, as determined by the State in consultation with a representative sample of local educational agencies, or who becomes a victim of a violent criminal offense, as determined by State law, while in or on the grounds of a public elementary school or secondary school that the student attends, be allowed to attend a safe public elementary school or secondary school within the local educational agency, including a public charter school.
FROM NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND: Requires States to establish policies allowing transfer to a safe public school within their LEA to students who attend persistently dangerous schools or who are victims of violent crimes in school or on school grounds.
A letter came from the Department of Education regarding persistently dangerous school designations on May 7, 2025. This is a copy of that letter:
Apparently, the Trump Administration wants to give parents options. The problem is that States get to define the criteria they use to designate a school “persistently dangerous.”
Specific recommendations made were:
First, states need to review their definitions of what is a “persistently dangerous” school. This may mean reducing the period of time before a school is determined to be persistently dangerous. Some have criteria that must continue over two to three years. Maryland requires three years. The Department of Education suggests one year. Students should not have to live through multiple years of violent offenses and activities.
Next, states should review their data and information related to violent incidents as opposed to responses to violent incidents. For example, states should use data that relate to incidents (numbers of offenses) even when an offender is not apprehended and subsequently disciplined. States should also ensure that using referral metrics in their definition will not incentivize schools to underreport incidents or not upholding student discipline.
This direction is given because MANY school personnel are directed to underreport their violent incidents. Why? Because to honestly report will cost them money or even their job. I remember an Assistant Principal in a school who used to take all referrals, but most specifically referrals of violence, and stuff them in his desk drawer instead of reporting them as required. Mysteriously, these referrals disappeared and were never logged into the system. The AP was protecting himself, promoting himself as someone who prevented violence and misbehavior so that he could get elevated to a higher paying position in the system or, at the very least, keep his job.
Most Principals or Superintendents in public school districts care too much about their public image to report those stats honestly. Most tend to shove such events under the rug or to maintain plausible deniability about them by assigning lower-level administrators to “handle the problem.” Imagine being confronted with crime statistics from your system and claiming you had “no idea.” This helps them keep their six figure salaries.
Schools also underreport in order to claim that programs like “restorative discipline” and “restorative justice” actually work in preventing violent behavior in schools. Here is some information about restorative discipline:
Why School “Restorative Practices” Are Destructive – The Easton Gazette
Restorative Discipline: Crippling Kid’s Mental Maturity And Validating Violence – The Easton Gazette
The Department of Education recognized that many States were initially limited by the data they were already collecting and had available for consideration. However, they added that it is possible to utilize data from other sources, including referrals to the juvenile courts and reports by law enforcement personnel, including school resource officers.
The guidance also provided when and which transfer solutions should be provided to parents whose children attend a “persistently dangerous” school. For example, a child who is a victim of a violent criminal offense while in or on the grounds of a public elementary school or secondary school should have educational options to leave that school even if it is just one incident. The school itself may not be considered “persistently dangerous” overall but is considered unsafe or dangerous for that child. States could facilitate solutions for that child which could be another school in that district, in another district, or a charter school. They could also do that for students who are in “persistently dangerous” schools.
The Department also suggests that states work with local districts to improve school safety. They recommend this site:
Parents need to be aware of what is going on in their child’s school. Most parents we talk to tell us that they think their child’s school is “safe” and they have nothing to worry about. Unless their child comes home and tells them violence occurred at their school, these parents rarely know what goes on during the school day. If your child is a victim of school violence or attack, here are some suggestions:
What To Do If Your Child Is Physically Attacked At School – Save Our Schools March
The bottom line for parents is to stay involved and vigilant!
-Jan Greenhawk
The post Is Your Child’s School “Persistently Dangerous”? appeared first on The Easton Gazette.
