school safety in america essay

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

What Do the Data Reveal About Violence in Schools?

Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, Sandy Hook Elementary School, and Santa Fe High School, among others, are now synonymous with a particularly insidious form of violence in our nation — mass violence and school shootings. School shootings like these heighten the perception that schools are dangerous places for youth. Although no amount of school violence is ever acceptable, nationally available data on trends in violence and victimization at school reveal that levels of overall violence declined from 1992 to 2017. [1] How do we reconcile these trends with the pervasive sense that the number of school shootings is increasing and that schools are becoming increasingly dangerous places? This article explores that paradox by reviewing the trends in school violence from the most often cited sources of school safety data. It also discusses how we can explore this paradox further through an NIJ-funded study on school shootings and a federal effort to improve federal data and its implications for school safety.

At this time, there is no single data collection that captures the complete picture of the frequency, incidence, and trends in violent crime [2] in U.S. schools. Rather, government agencies and nongovernmental organizations employ numerous data sources and surveys. Some of this information is presented in Indicators of School Crime and Safety (the Indicators report), which is published regularly by the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics and the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics. The report establishes reliable indicators of the current state of school crime and safety across the nation and is helpful in tracking specific indicators over time; however, it also contains an amalgamation of information on school safety that is not easily interpreted. This is compounded by the lack of agreed-upon focus and definitions across the sources from which the Indicators report draws its data, the irregularity of the data collections, the different populations surveyed (e.g., students versus principals), and differences in how questions are phrased.

A review of the most widely used and well-known data sources reveals that incidents of multiple-victim youth homicides in schools started declining in 1994 but have been increasing since 2009. [3] Thus, the public’s perception that there is an increased likelihood of a school shooting is grounded in an increase in multiple-victim, school-associated deaths. Despite this increase, however, the rates of violent victimization and serious violent victimization at school are low and have been decreasing since the 1990s. This disconnect raises the question of whether we are collecting the right indicators for understanding trends in school violence.

To help answer this question and improve school safety data collection, NIJ funded researchers to create an open-source database for tracking shootings on K-12 school grounds. This research may help uncover why multiple-victim homicide incidents have been increasing. In addition, in 2019 the Office of Management and Budget released the Federal Data Strategy, which presents an opportunity to examine and rethink the way the federal government collects data on school safety. Both efforts have the potential to help us better understand the nature and extent of violent crime that occurs in schools — and ultimately how best to prevent future incidents.

Understanding the Scope of Violent Crime in Schools

Following is a review of data and current trends in school crime and violence. The data sets included in this review — though by no means an exhaustive list — are perhaps the most widely used and well-known national data sources for violence in schools.

School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey

The School Crime Supplement (SCS) to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is sponsored by the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the National Center for Education Statistics. It collects data on alcohol and drug availability, bullying and cyberbullying, disorder and rule enforcement, extracurricular activities, fear and avoidance behaviors, fights, gangs, graffiti, hate words, school characteristics, school security, school transportation, social bonding, and weapons in school. It is a nationally representative household survey. The respondents to the SCS are students ages 12-18 in NCVS households who are enrolled in U.S. public and private elementary, middle, and high schools. Since 1989, [4] student data reported to the SCS have been the primary source of data used to generate national estimates of criminal and bullying victimization in schools and to evaluate differences in the prevalence of victimization over time and among different student groups. [5]

According to the latest SCS data collected in 2017, being the victim of a violent crime at school is rare. About 1% of students surveyed reported experiencing a violent victimization in the six months prior to survey completion and less than 0.5% reported a serious violent victimization. [6] Serious violent victimizations include rape, sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault. Violent victimizations include all of the serious violent victimizations as well as simple assault. Between 2001 and 2017, the percentage of students who reported being victimized at school during the six months prior to survey completion decreased for both violent victimizations (from 2% to 1%) and serious violent victimizations (from 1% to less than 0.5%). [7]

Bullying is also a serious concern in schools. Bullying can be verbal (being threatened, called names, or insulted) and physical (being pushed, shoved, tripped, or spit on). Bullying may occur in various ways, including in person and virtually through social media. We know that some school shooters felt bullied, victimized, persecuted, or injured by others prior to their attacks. In some instances, the attacker experienced bullying that was long-standing and severe. [8] According to the SCS, about 5% of students surveyed in 2017 reported being subject to this physical bullying behavior. [9]

Students’ fear of being harmed has also decreased in the past few decades. [10] The SCS asks students about their perceptions of safety and fear of attack at school during the school year. Between 2001 and 2017, the percentage of students who reported being afraid of attack or harm at school decreased overall (from 6% to 4%). [11]

School Survey on Crime and Safety

The School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) is administered by the National Center for Education Statistics and provides school-level data on crime and safety. First administered during the 1999-2000 school year, the SSOCS is a nationally representative, cross-sectional survey of approximately 4,800 public elementary and secondary schools in the United States. It is completed by school principals and other administrators, and provides information on school crime, discipline, disorder, programs, and policies. [12]

Of particular relevance to this review, the SSOCS collects and reports data on two overlapping categories of crime: violent crime and serious violent crime. Violent crime incidents can range from a threat of a physical attack to robbery or to a serious violent incident such as a physical attack, sexual assault, or rape. According to the SSOCS, a subset of violent crime incidents can be categorized as serious violent incidents. A serious violent incident may include rape, sexual assault other than rape, physical attack or fight with a weapon, a threat of physical attack with a weapon, and robbery with or without a weapon.

Although most schools report at least one incident of violent crime per year, the trends for violent crime and serious violent crime in schools have been decreasing. According to the latest available SSOCS data, 71% of schools reported at least one incident of a violent crime during the 2017-2018 school year. [13] This number seems to be decreasing — 66% of public schools recorded physical attacks or fights without a weapon in 2017-2018 compared with 71% in 2009-2010. When serious violent crime is examined as a subset of violent crime, approximately 21% of schools reported at least one serious violent incident at school in 2017-2018.

The SSOCS also asks principals about bullying. In 2009-2010, approximately 30% of schools reported incidents of bullying in the past week. However, in the 2017-2018 survey, only about 14% of schools reported incidents of bullying in the past week. [14]

School-Associated Violent Death Surveillance System

Of all violent crimes, homicides are the most well-documented. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been collecting data on school-associated violent deaths since the early 1990s.

The School-Associated Violent Death Surveillance System (SAVD-SS) — sponsored by the U.S. Departments of Education and Justice as well as the CDC — tracks lethal violence (i.e., homicides, suicides, and legal intervention deaths) on school grounds or on the way to and from school. Researchers scan open sources of data, including computerized newspapers and broadcast media databases via LexisNexis, to identify incidents of death related to schools. Their searches use keywords such as “shooting, death, violent, strangulation, beating, attack, stabbing, and died,” combined with phrases such as “primary, secondary, elementary, junior, high, middle school.”

Once lethal violent incidents (i.e., cases) are identified, researchers apply a four-step verification process that includes the schools and law enforcement agencies involved in investigating the deaths. Copies of law enforcement reports also help confirm case details and whether the case meets the inclusion criteria. The cases included are ones in which a fatality occurred:

• On a public or private primary or secondary school campus in the United States.
• While the victim was on the way to or from regular sessions at school.
• While the victim was attending or traveling to or from an official school-sponsored event.

In the SAVD-SS, victims include students, staff members, and others.

The trends from July 1994 through June 2016 indicate that on average, school-associated violent deaths accounted for less than 3% of all youth homicides in the United States consistently throughout this time frame. [15] The most recent SAVD-SS data cover the period from July 1, 2015, through June 30, 2016. During this period, there were 38 student, staff, and nonstudent school-associated violent deaths in the United States; 30 of these were homicides, seven were suicides, and one death resulted from legal intervention. During this same period, there were 1,478 youth homicides and 1,941 youth suicides in the United States.

There are differences between single-victim homicide trends and multiple-victim homicide trends. From 1994 to 2016, there were approximately 423 school-associated homicide incidents, including 393 single-victim incidents and about 30 multiple-victim incidents. [16] According to SAVD-SS data, approximately 90% of school-related youth homicide incidents involve a single victim, which is contrary to the perception that most school-related youth homicides occur in the context of a mass shooting. Among homicides with known motives, gang-related activity (58.2%) and interpersonal disputes (44%) were the most common motives for single-victim, school-related homicides, suggesting that these homicides may reflect broader communitywide causes of violence. [17] The proportion of single-victim, school-related homicides hovers around or below 2% of all youth homicides occurring from 1994 to 2016.

The SAVD-SS provides evidence of an increase in the number of multiple-victim homicides in recent years. The homicides associated with multiple-victim incidents increased from June 2009 through the 2017-2018 school year. [18] Although likely related to only eight specific incidents occurring on or after July 2016, this increase has no clear explanations.

Synthesizing the Findings

The data sources examined above indicate that students are not often the victims of violent and serious violent crime in schools. These trends have been decreasing since 2001. Physical bullying victimization has also been on a downward trend since 2009-2010. Schools have reported fewer incidents of violent crime and serious violent crime, and these too have been on a downward trend since 2009-2010. School homicides, in comparison to other youth homicides, are relatively rare, with less than 38 deaths reported from July 2015 to July 2016. These are encouraging findings in the context of understanding trends in school safety.

While these findings give us a great deal of information, there is still much more to understand about school safety. In the midst of these trends pointing to decreases in violent crime, serious violent crime, and bullying in schools, one indicator has been increasing: multiple-victim associated deaths at schools. Single-victim homicide rates have remained relatively stable over time. [19] However, multiple-victim homicide incidents are increasing, and we do not know why.

NIJ’s School Shooting Database

To help fill this knowledge gap, NIJ funded a project through its Comprehensive School Safety Initiative to create an open-source database that includes all publicly known school shootings resulting in at least one firearm death or injury that occurred on school grounds in the United States from January 1, 1990, to December 31, 2016. Joshua Freilich at John Jay College, Steven Chermak at Michigan State University, and Nadine Connell, formerly at the University of Texas at Dallas, are conducting this work. Once completed, the School Shooting Database (SSDB) will be used to document the nature of the problem and clarify the types of shooting incidents that occur in schools. It will also provide a comprehensive understanding of the individuals who commit school shootings; test causal factors to assess whether mass and non-mass school shootings are comparable; and compare fatal and nonfatal shooting incidents to identify intervention points that could be exploited to reduce the harm caused by school shootings.

The method of data collection in this project has been intensive and painstaking. First, the researchers reviewed more than 45 sources, lists, and chronologies that already tracked school violence. This allowed the researchers to create their sample frame for school shootings during the study period. They also reviewed additional listings of specific cases that the media and other accounts of particular events included or referenced. The researchers then contacted organizations that might have a relevant database for information on incidents of school shootings. Through this outreach, they cross-referenced every school shooting incident reported on any currently available database. Second, they searched specific key terms across a series of search engines and media sources to identify additional incidents. For this database, school shootings that resulted in injury (not limited to homicide) and occurred on K-12 school grounds are included. For every incident identified, the researchers then systematically searched more than 20 additional search engines simultaneously looking for relevant data on the incident, the school, the victim(s), and the person who committed the crime.

Though the SSDB is still in development, researchers to date have identified 660 incidents of school shootings that resulted in injury from 1990 to 2016. [20] Each incident is treated as a case study, and the goal is to collect all of the information available for each incident. To do this, the SSDB team uses a search protocol that includes more than 60 search engines or sites. These include media aggregators, web-based newspaper archives, legal research services, administrative sources (e.g., state Department of Corrections records, the FBI’s National Incident-Based Reporting System and Supplemental Homicide Reports, and local police websites), academic sources, notable incident trackers, people searches and white pages, social media, public records, and criminal and background check services. These searches lead to a trove of public information that includes published interviews (both scholarly and journalistic), obituaries, news articles, biographies, scholarly overviews, and social media. This information is then reviewed to fill in values of hundreds of attributes on the incident, school, individual committing the crime, and victim levels. The SSDB also captures the reliability of the open source information in numerous ways and has addressed both inter-searcher and inter-rater (inter-coder) reliability issues; in the future, it will empirically investigate selectivity bias. In addition, the researchers will highlight key characteristics for each incident, victim, and individual perpetrating the shooting to help law enforcement and school administrators differentiate between various kinds of school shootings and develop appropriate prevention efforts and responses for individuals and the community. This research has the real potential to help us understand why multiple-victim homicide incidents have been increasing over the last 10 years.

Improving Federal School Safety Data Collections

Recently, the Office of Management and Budget — the federal agency that implements the administration’s policy, budget, management, and regulatory objectives — released the “Federal Data Strategy – A Framework for Consistency.” [21] This Federal Data Strategy (FDS) uses and manages federal data to best serve the public while getting optimal use from the data and protecting data security and privacy. Its purpose is to guide the federal government in practicing ethical governance, conscious design, and a learning culture.

The FDS describes several principles and practices that should guide the federal government’s thinking about data. Several principles are particularly relevant to how the federal government collects, analyzes, and presents school safety data. For example, the strategy discusses the principle of conscious design, specifically that agencies should “harness existing data … to inform priority research and policy questions; reuse data if possible and acquire additional data if needed.” [22]

As discussed in the introduction of this article, there has been an effort across some federal agencies to collect in one place data that inform interested stakeholders regarding school safety: the Indicators of School Crime and Safety report. This report, which is updated regularly, establishes reliable indicators of the current state of school crime and safety across the nation. It covers topics such as victimization, teacher injury, bullying and electronic bullying, school conditions, fights, weapons, availability and student use of drugs and alcohol, student perceptions of personal safety at school, and criminal incidents at postsecondary institutions. It is not meant to be an exhaustive compilation of school crime and safety information, nor is it meant to explore the causes of crime and violence in schools.

The indicators reported are based on information drawn from various data sources, including national surveys of students, teachers, principals, and postsecondary institutions. This provides opportunities for analyzing multiple aspects of crime and victimization in schools but also presents its fair share of unique challenges that limit the report’s utility. For example, each data source used in the Indicators report has an independent sample design, time frame, data collection method, and questionnaire design — or it is the result of a universal data collection. This makes it difficult to compare indicators from one study with similar indicators from another data source. In addition, the time frame between data collections may range from every year to every five years. The Indicators report is released every year, and this time-frame issue may result in certain indicators being reported as the same year after year.

Although the Indicators report makes a valuable contribution to our overall understanding of school crime and safety, it is an aggregate of information from various school safety data sources, including some of those mentioned above. It is not a coordinated strategy across the federal government for collecting school safety data.

The FDS offers the federal government a unique opportunity to seize this moment in time and evaluate the school safety data that are being collected, how they are being used and by whom, and whether additional data are needed. In support of the FDS, agencies across the federal government can partner to develop a coordinated, thoughtful strategy for collecting school safety data that could resolve issues surrounding time frames, sample frames, comparability of results, and data analysis. The FDS also presents an opportunity for the federal government to create data thoughtfully, consider use by others, and plan for the future through data reuse. Finally, the FDS offers an opportunity for federal agencies to coordinate and share their data assets to advance progress on school safety, fulfill the need for broader federal information, and reduce data collection burdens.

Moving Forward

The review of these major data sets illuminates several interesting findings about the nature and extent of violent crime in schools. For example, physical bullying and threats to students have decreased over the last decades, and overall violent crime in schools has also decreased steadily, but there has been an increase in the number of multiple-victim homicides related to schools in recent years.

For educators, policymakers, and law enforcement officials to prevent these incidents in the future, we need to understand the factors that are contributing to this increase in multiple-victim homicides in schools. The school safety field would benefit from thoughtfully reconsidering data collections, guided by efforts such as the SSDB and the FDS. Specifically, the field should align the approaches taken to collect these important data with unanswered questions, while avoiding increased data collection burdens.

For More Information

Learn about NIJ’s Comprehensive School Safety Initiative .

Read the Indicators of School Crime and Safety report .

About This Article

This article was published in the NIJ Journal Issue Number 282.

This article discusses the following grant:

• “Understanding the Causes of School Violence Using Open Source Data,” grant number 2016-CK-BX-0013

[note 1] Lauren Musu et al., Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2018 , Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics and U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, April 2019, NCES 2019-047, NCJ 252571.

[note 2] In this article, a violent crime is one where a victim is harmed by or threatened with physical violence.

[note 3] Kristin Holland et al., “ Characteristics of School-Associated Youth Homicides – United States, 1994-2018 ,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 68 no. 3 (January 25, 2019): 53-60.

[note 4] The School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey was first administered in 1989, then again in 1995, 1999, and 2001 through 2017 biennially.

[note 5] Deborah Lessne, Christina Yanez, and Michael Sinclair, Measuring School Climate Using the 2015 School Crime Supplement , Technical Report, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, October 2018, NCES 2018-098.

[note 6] Musu et al., Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2018 .

[note 7] Musu et al., Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2018 .

[note 8] Bryan Vossekuil et al., The Final Report and Findings of the Safe School Initiative: Implications for the Prevention of School Attacks in the United States , Washington, DC: U.S. Secret Service and U.S. Department of Education, July 2004; and Randy Borum et al., “What Can Be Done About School Shootings? A Review of the Evidence,” Educational Researcher 39 no. 1 (February 2010): 27-37.

[note 9] Musu et al., Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2018 .

[note 10] Mary Poulin Carlton, Summary of School Safety Statistics , NIJ Report, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 2017, NCJ 250610.

[note 11] Musu et al., Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2018 .

[note 12] NIJ has supported the last two data collections by providing the National Center for Education Statistics with supplemental funds through the Comprehensive School Safety Initiative. See https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/ongoing-comprehensive-school-safety-initiative-research#two014 .

[note 13] All data in this paragraph are drawn from Melissa Diliberti et al., Crime, Violence, Discipline, and Safety in U.S. Public Schools: Findings From the School Survey on Crime and Safety: 2017-18 , Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, July 2019, NCES 2019-061.

[note 14] Diliberti et al., Crime, Violence, Discipline, and Safety in U.S. Public Schools .

[note 15] All data in this paragraph are drawn from Musu et al., Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2018 .

[note 16] All data in this paragraph are drawn from Holland et al., “ Characteristics of School-Associated Youth Homicides .”

[note 17] These percentages do not add to 100% because one homicide may have multiple motives.

[note 18] Holland et al., “ Characteristics of School-Associated Youth Homicides .”

[note 19] Holland et al. demonstrate that although the victimization rate of school-associated, multiple-victim homicides per 100,000 fluctuated from 1994 to 2018, the incidence rate during that period remained relatively stable.

[note 20] These estimates do not correspond to the SAVD-SS because the time frame of the SAVD-SS is from 1994 to 2018, while the SSDB covers 1990 to 2019. Also, the SSDB includes injuries as well as deaths.

[note 21] Office of Management and Budget, “ Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Federal Data Strategy – A Framework for Consistency ,” Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, June 4, 2019.

[note 22] Office of Management and Budget, “ Federal Data Strategy ,” 2.

About the author

Nadine Frederique, Ph.D., is a senior social science analyst in NIJ’s Office of Research, Evaluation, and Technology.

Cite this Article

Read more about:, related publications.

• NIJ Journal Issue No. 282

Related Awards

• Understanding the Causes of School Violence Using Open Source Data

School Safety

Fast Fact: Preventing School Violence

School violence is violence that occurs in the school setting. It describes violent acts that disrupt learning and have a negative effect on students, schools, and the broader community. School is the location where the violence occurs, not a type of violence.

Examples of school violence include:

• Bullying and cyberbullying
• Fighting (e.g., punching, slapping, kicking)
• Gang violence
• Sexual violence

Places school violence occurs:

• On school property
• On the way to or from school
• During a school-sponsored event
• On the way to or from a school-sponsored event

In 2019, CDC’s nationwide Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) was administered to high school students across the United States. According to YRBS results  from 13, 677 students:

• About 1 in 5 high school students reported being bullied on school property in the last year.
• 8% of high school students had been in a physical fight on school property one or more times during the 12 months before the survey.
• More than 7% of high school students had been threatened or injured with a weapon (for example, a gun, knife, or club) on school property one or more times during the 12 months before the survey.
• Almost 9% of high school students had not gone to school at least 1 day during the 30 days before the survey because they felt they would be unsafe at school or on their way to or from school.

All students have the right to learn in a safe school environment. The good news is school violence can be prevented. Many factors contribute to school violence. Preventing school violence requires addressing the factors that put people at risk for or protect them from violence. Research shows that prevention efforts by teachers, administrators, parents, community members, and even students can reduce violence and improve the school environment.

CDC developed Resources for Action , formerly known as, “technical packages,” to help communities and states prioritize prevention strategies based on the best available evidence. The strategies and approaches in the Resources for Action are intended to shape individual behaviors as well as the relationship, family, school, community, and societal factors that influence risk and protective factors for violence. They are meant to work together and to be used in combination in a multi-level, multi-sector effort to prevent violence.

See  Youth Violence Resources  for articles, publications, data sources, and prevention resources for school violence.

To receive email updates about this page, enter your email address:

• Data & Statistics (WISQARS)
• Opioid Overdose Prevention
• Traumatic Brain Injury
• Motor Vehicle Safety

Exit Notification / Disclaimer Policy

• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) cannot attest to the accuracy of a non-federal website.
• Linking to a non-federal website does not constitute an endorsement by CDC or any of its employees of the sponsors or the information and products presented on the website.
• You will be subject to the destination website's privacy policy when you follow the link.
• CDC is not responsible for Section 508 compliance (accessibility) on other federal or private website.

June 17, 2022

Why do school shootings keep happening in the United States?

Vcu homeland security expert william v. pelfrey jr. answers this question and more., share this story.

• Share on Twitter
• Share on Facebook
• Share on LinkedIn

By Joan Tupponce

The first thought that raced through William Pelfrey Jr.’s mind when he heard the breaking news about the school shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, was typical of any parent with young kids.

“It made me want to get into my vehicle and drive to their schools,” said Pelfrey, Ph.D., an expert in the field of homeland security, terrorism and radicalization and a professor of homeland security/emergency preparedness and criminal justice in the L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs at Virginia Commonwealth University. “From a professional perspective, it reminded me there are too many people with guns, the wrong people with guns and that nothing is going to change.”

Guns are now the leading cause of death among children and adolescents in the U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. No other developed economy has as many violent firearm deaths as the U.S., according to the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation.

“School shootings happen in the U.S. at an alarming rate, but they rarely happen elsewhere in the world. Eighty or 90 percent of all the school shootings in the world happen in the U.S. They are concentrated here,” Pelfrey said.

How did the U.S. get to this point and what can be done? Pelfrey fields those questions and more with VCU News.

Why does this keep happening?

It’s a simple question, but the answers are extremely complicated. There are some political overtones to it. Guns are ubiquitous in the U.S. There are more guns than people. The U.S. population is about 334 million and the number of guns in the U.S. is more than 390 million (according to a report by the Small Arms Survey, a Geneva-based organization). We have the highest civilian gun ownership in the world by a huge margin. That’s an extraordinary number relative to the rest of the world. The next countries that have as many guns are war-torn countries like Serbia or Yemen.

Another element is school safety is not as high as it should be. It’s easy to maintain basic school safety but not everybody does a good job of that.

A third element is social media, a component that revolves around how people make it OK on social media to act on violence. There is a faction of government, particularly a right-wing government element, that condones or encourages violence. They do so in an oblique way saying something like, “Our country is under threat. We have to stand up and protect our country. We need to take up arms to defend our country, our way of life.” When you do that, you are condoning acts that are dangerous. The U.S. border is populated by a lot of citizens who have dubbed themselves border protection and they stand at the border with guns waiting for someone to illegally cross the border and they take them into custody even though they are not law enforcement.

How do you categorize mass shootings?

Some are artifacts of bullying. A victim of bullying decides they are going to respond with extreme violence, and it’s usually not against their perpetrators. It’s a show of force to demonstrate they won’t be bullied again. They can stand up for themselves. That describes Sandy Hook and Columbine and some other shootings.

The second category of mass shootings is domestic terrorism. Those people had been self-radicalized on social media and believe their actions represent a higher good. What they are doing is for a bigger purpose than themselves. They are willing to die, almost like a suicide terrorist, to further the goals of the theology they support.

A lot of people don’t fit into either category. The mass shooting era began with Charles Whitman in 1966 when he climbed a bell tower at the University of Texas and started shooting people. He did that because he had a tumor in his brain. There was no kind of pattern, but it created a behavioral matrix that has been followed by any number of people in the U.S.

How easy is it to buy a gun?

In the U.S., you can walk into a gun store and buy as many assault rifles as you want if you have cash and are over 18 and you meet just a couple of other loose criteria. Guns are so easily obtained that it’s easy to commit violent crime. We don’t do a good job in our criminal justice system of prohibiting people that probably shouldn’t have them from securing guns.

In most countries there are tests you have to take. You have to demonstrate you need a gun for a specific reason. You have to pass a gun ownership exam to show you can use it safely. You have to maintain license requirements. We don’t do any of that in the U.S. We are going the other way. Texas last year made it easier for people to get a gun in what was already an incredibly permissive state.

What types of guns are especially dangerous to own?

Assault weapons — assault rifles and assault pistols. We don’t track who buys them. You go into a gun store and buy a gun. A criminal background check is run, but no one keeps track of what you bought or how much you paid for it or what you do with it when you walk out the door. You could buy 20 assault rifles, drive to Washington, D.C., and sell them and nobody knows it because there is no reporting mechanism to identify that you sold the guns.

It is a crime to sell a gun to a convicted felon or to take them out of state to sell. But our penalties are so lax that it’s not a deterrent. A straw buyer is a person who buys guns legally and then illegally sells them for profit. There are a small number of gun stores that welcome straw buyers and subsequently represent easy funnels for guns in illegal locations. Straw buyers go to stores where they know they can walk in with $30,000 or $40,000 in cash and walk out with a bunch of pistols and assault rifles and go back to the streets and sell those guns, especially in cities with restrictive gun laws. That’s one of the cheap mechanisms for guns getting into the hands of criminals.

Why is screening a person who wants to buy a gun so important?

There are people who should have red flags that would preclude gun ownership, but we don’t have that in place. We could look over the past 20 or so years at some of the major school shootings like Parkwood (Florida); Newtown (Connecticut); Columbine (Colorado); Uvalde (Texas); even the shooting in Buffalo (New York). These were people that had a history of mental illness or a history of being bullied and were threatening to lash out. People don’t seem to connect the risk factors to gun ownership and the propensity for subsequent violence. And that is just a tragedy.

What is the role of social media in all of this?

It has a powerful role because of far-right extremism. The Buffalo shooter was a self-radicalized domestic terrorist. He had a strongly held belief about the infringement of races on the Caucasian race. He was an avid follower of far-right extremists’ diatribe and used some of what he found as rationalization to act and commit violence.

Not true for every shooter. In Columbine, Newtown, Uvaldi, these were bullied misfits. They didn’t fit in groups and had a history of being marginalized by their peers. They found a different path for getting even and that was through violence. But there is a different population and I believe it’s one of the most dangerous threats to the U.S. and that is far-right extremists, which inspired far-right violent extremists. Social media has a tremendous role in that. There is no single bad guy we can legitimize or take out. There are hundreds of podcasts and thousands of self-proclaimed thought leaders and they write really nasty, vicious stuff and have followers. Some of those people act on what they read. No government entity does a good job counter-messaging extremists.

How does bullying play into this?

Schools don’t do a great job with bullying prevention. One of my areas of research is bullying and cyberbullying. I’ve worked with schools, and we talk about bullying identification. Schools don’t do that until it’s too late. Schools need to adopt bullying and cyberbullying identification measures and then practice them. The best tactic I’ve seen is analogous to the “see something, say something” messaging that was rampant in New York after 9/11. That same logic can be applied in schools to enable citizens to get involved in terrorism prevention. Students can be empowered to identify bullies and then the school can come in to support fellow students.

Some people talk about arming teachers or school administrators. What do you think of that as a way of prevention?

Several years ago, Virginia considered doing that. I did a report for the Department of Criminal Justice Services in Virginia on the merits and risks of arming school personnel. Most high schools have an armed resource officer on scene, but most middle and elementary schools don’t. Arming teachers or school personnel is an incredibly dangerous enterprise that could lead to the death of that person because if police respond to a shooting and see someone with a gun, they are going to shoot them. Or, the teacher could accidentally shoot another staff member or police officer or, in the worst case, a student.

At Uvalde, there was a police resource officer on scene, at Columbine a school resource officer was on scene, at Parkland a school resource officer was on scene. If a trained police officer can’t prevent a school shooting, what are the chances that a teacher who is not well trained can prevent a school shooting? I think the odds are pretty low. I think the risk dramatically outweighs any potential benefits.

Can you talk about the opposite views we have in the U.S. about guns?

We live in a country with two competing paradigms. One thought paradigm is that everybody needs guns and then we will all be safe. The other is the exact opposite. Nobody should have guns and we will all be safe. Those two paradigms cannot coexist. They are diametrically opposed. But our political structure is such that they can’t be reconciled.

After the Sandy Hook shooting there was a huge motivation for gun control, limiting who could buy guns and the kind of guns people could buy. That faded away rapidly. I expect the same thing will happen here, and it’s depressing to say that, but I see very little political will to enact any meaningful changes.

Mass shootings are going to happen again. It’s a pattern. School shootings and mass shootings happen about every year or two in the U.S. and I guarantee that there is going to be another one in a year and another one after that and nothing is going to change until enough people develop a political will to support meaningful gun changes.

What predictions do you have for the future when it comes to gun laws?

I expect there will be some change in gun laws, but they won’t be substantial. It will provide political cover for some people to say we are doing things, we are making things safer, but they won’t make things safer. I expect gun sales will go up even more because people now feel like they have to protect themselves and their family members because the government isn’t doing that.

I also expect that there is going to be some investigation into police practices at Uvalde because police didn’t go into that school immediately. In fact, several police officers stood outside waiting for reinforcements to arrive. That is going to lead to internal investigation and also police policy changes, which I expect will become popular across the U.S. Many police departments implemented a policy suggesting officers need to go into a school and engage an active shooter no matter what. That didn’t happen in Uvalde. As a policing expert, I don’t know how that is possible.

Do people use mental health as a scapegoat for these shootings?

Yes, it’s an easy target. A lot of people point to mental health and say the U.S. needs more mental health funding. They disregard there was a gun that shot these people. Only a small percentage of these shootings were people that had been diagnosed with a mental illness. We want to rationalize this type of behavior. We want to understand it. We presume that the people who commit these vile acts are disturbed, that they are mentally ill, otherwise they are like us and that’s untenable.

It creates an easy political target that allows politicians to rationalize their failure to enact reasonable gun laws. We have laws about who can buy guns — you have to be 18, you can’t be a convicted felon. There are guns that are restrictive. It’s not legal to sell fully automatic weapons. You can’t buy a tank. But whenever reasonable gun restrictions are opposed or discussed, there is a small faction of citizens and politicians that go crazy, and that’s a tragedy.

Over the past 50 years there has only been one meaningful law passed limiting guns — the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, passed under President Bill Clinton. That expired 10 years later under a Republican president. When that expired, people began buying guns at a substantially higher rate than ever before. They presumed that under another Democratic president or Congress gun sales would be limited again. So assault rifles, which had been a small portion of gun purchases prior to the ban, became a big part of gun sales.

Estimates are that a quarter to a third of all guns sold now in the U.S. are assault rifle platforms. That is a big number. Seven years after the ban expired, guns sales had doubled. A few years later they doubled again. It’s amazing that the ban had a counter-productive effect, which is it dramatically increased gun sales and people’s motivations to buy guns, particularly assault rifles.

As a policing expert, there is no reason anyone who is not military or law enforcement should ever have an assault rifle. I come from a family of hunters. Every year we would go hunting. I know rifles and shotguns. An assault rifle is a vastly inferior tool for anything other than shooting people. It’s not good for hunting or self-defense. A shotgun or a pistol is more effective. There is no reason for a civilian to have an assault rifle, but they do.

Each issue of the VCU News newsletter includes a roundup of top headlines from the university’s central news source and a listing of highlighted upcoming events. The newsletter is distributed on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. To subscribe, visit  newsletter.vcu.edu/ . All VCU and VCU Health email account holders are automatically subscribed to the newsletter.

Subscribe to VCU News

Subscribe to VCU News at newsletter.vcu.edu and receive a selection of stories, videos, photos, news clips and event listings in your inbox.

Most popular

April 29, 2024

For VCU students, foreign expedition offered a river of knowledge and memories

April 19, 2024

Three siblings are chasing their dreams – and supporting each other – as students in the VCU School of Medicine

April 23, 2024

With quick thinking and CPR skills, pre-med student Nyla Harris helped save a restaurant customer’s life

April 17, 2024

Class of 2024: Deja Cooke returned to college to pursue a dream of a career in criminal justice

Latest headlines

May 1, 2024

Class of 2024: Alyssa Sievers turned injury into opportunity and found her passion for physical therapy

Four VCU students and two recent alums selected for prestigious National Science Foundation funding

Monument at Shafer Court highlights a golden moment for Black fraternity at VCU

April 30, 2024

A Message from President Rao

Home — Essay Samples — Education — Issues in Education — Importance Of School Safety

Importance of School Safety

• Categories: Issues in Education

About this sample

Words: 589 |

Published: Mar 19, 2024

Words: 589 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

Table of contents

Introduction, 1. physical security measures, 2. emotional well-being, 3. positive school culture, 4. preventive measures.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Education

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 823 words

8 pages / 3443 words

4 pages / 1792 words

1 pages / 430 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Issues in Education

The debate over whether mobile phones should be banned in schools underscores the need for a nuanced and informed approach. While concerns about distractions and misuse are valid, the advantages of incorporating mobile phones [...]

With obesity rates on the rise, and student MVPA time at an all time low, it is important, now more than ever, to provide students with tools and creative opportunities for a healthy and active lifestyle. A school following a [...]

When it comes to the views of role of education, there are two views with different interest that there are in American society. 'the traditional view linked closely to the order, or functionalist, perspective in sociology, is [...]

College education has long been a topic of debate, particularly regarding its accessibility and affordability. In recent years, the cost of college education has risen significantly, leading to a growing concern about the [...]

It is a necessary ethnical appropriate and a primary leader concerning human then financial improvement on someone u . s . . it no longer only strengthens personal honor but additionally shapes the society between who we live. [...]

The severity of poor education in third world countries are so vital because millions of uneducated children don't have any or little education to exceed in life and help them open their eyes to their true potential. [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Schools try to balance freedom of speech and security during student protests

Sequoia Carrillo

Schools weigh freedom of speech and safety risks as nationwide protests pop up on college campuses over the Israel-Hamas conflict.

Copyright © 2024 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• From Businesses and Banks to Colleges and Churches: Americans’ Views of U.S. Institutions
• 1. Colleges and universities, K-12 public schools

Table of Contents

• 2. Small and large businesses, banks, and technology companies
• 3. Labor unions
• 4. Churches and religious organizations
• 5. The U.S. military
• Acknowledgments
• Methodology

Americans’ views of whether educational institutions are having a positive or negative impact on the country are essentially unchanged since late 2022 . About half (53%) say colleges and universities are having a positive impact, while 45% say they’re having a negative impact.

Views of the impact of K-12 public schools are identical (53% positive, 45% negative). These also are little changed from 2022, though somewhat less positive than in 2021 (when 61% had a positive opinion).

Partisanship and ideology

Democrats are about twice as likely as Republicans to view both colleges and K-12 schools positively.

Roughly three-quarters (74%) of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents say colleges have a positive impact – nearly as many (72%) say the same of K-12 public schools.

Only about a third of Republicans and Republican leaners express positive opinions about the impact of colleges (31%) or K-12 public schools (34%). 

There is a sharp ideological divide among Republicans in views of educational institutions. Just 20% of conservative Republicans say colleges have a positive impact – roughly half the share of moderate and liberal Republicans who say the same (53%). The difference is similar when it comes to opinions about how K-12 public schools affect the country.

Democrats are less ideologically divided: Liberal Democrats are more likely than conservative and moderate Democrats to view colleges and public schools positively, but sizable majorities in both groups say colleges and public schools have a positive effect.

Age, education

Younger adults and those with more formal education are more likely than older adults and those with less education to view educational institutions positively.

Colleges and universities

• Roughly six-in-ten of those ages 18 to 29 (63%) say that colleges and universities are having a positive impact, compared with 56% of those 30 to 49 and 52% of those 50 to 64.
• Among those ages 65 and older, more say that colleges are having a negative impact (56%) than say they are having a positive impact (40%).
• 59% of those with at least a bachelor’s degree view colleges and universities positively, compared with 50% of those without a bachelor’s degree.

K-12 public schools

• 58% of adults under 30 say that K-12 schools are having a positive impact, as do 54% of adults ages 30 to 64. This drops to 46% among those ages 65 and older.
• Six-in-ten college graduates say that K-12 public schools are having a positive impact, compared with 49% of those without college degrees.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Business & Workplace
• Higher Education
• Military & Veterans
• Partisanship & Issues
• Religious Leaders & Institutions
• Tech Companies
• Trust in Government

A look at small businesses in the U.S.

Majorities of adults see decline of union membership as bad for the u.s. and working people, a look at black-owned businesses in the u.s., 2023 saw some of the biggest, hardest-fought labor disputes in recent decades, older workers are growing in number and earning higher wages, most popular, report materials.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Age & Generations
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Economy & Work
• Family & Relationships
• Gender & LGBTQ
• Immigration & Migration
• International Affairs
• Internet & Technology
• Methodological Research
• News Habits & Media
• Non-U.S. Governments
• Other Topics
• Politics & Policy
• Race & Ethnicity
• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Cookie Settings

Reprints, Permissions & Use Policy

Advertisement

Supported by

What We Know About the Protests and Arrests at Columbia University

After nearly two weeks of protests, demonstrators seized Hamilton Hall. By the end of the night, the police moved into to arrest them.

• Share full article

By Alan Blinder

Columbia University is grappling with the fallout from its president’s promise to Congress that she would crack down on unsanctioned protests, and her decision to ask the police to clear an encampment on campus, resulting in the arrests of more than 100 students earlier this month.

On Tuesday, after protesters seized Hamilton Hall overnight, Columbia called in the police again and asked officers to remain on campus until May 17, after commencement.

“The events on campus last night have left us no choice,” Nemat Shafik, Columbia’s president, said in a letter to a New York Police Department official on Tuesday.

Police officers in riot gear made dozens of arrests and removed banners from Hamilton Hall’s facade overnight. An encampment near the building was cleared, leaving behind square indents on the grass on Wednesday morning. The campus was still closed on Wednesday to everyone but students who lived there and employees who provided essential services.

Dr. Shafik’s plea for the police presence came after almost two weeks of protests rocked the university, with demonstrators building (and rebuilding) an encampment, recriminations over the initial summoning of the police to campus on April 18, and accusations that Columbia has effectively allowed protesters, in some instances, to celebrate Hamas and target Jewish students for intimidation.

Last week, the university started offering hybrid classes, an acknowledgment that the disputes at the center of campus tension were unlikely to be resolved before the end of the school year. Commencement is scheduled for May 15.

On Friday, university leaders signaled that they were not eager to call in the police again.

“We called on N.Y.P.D. to clear an encampment once, but we all share the view, based on discussions within our community and with outside experts, that to bring back the N.Y.P.D. at this time would be counterproductive, further inflaming what is happening on campus, and drawing thousands to our doorstep who would threaten our community,” Columbia leaders, including Dr. Shafik, wrote. “Having said that, we also need to continue to enforce our own rules and ensure that those who violate the norms of our community face consequences.”

Columbia said Monday evening that it had started to suspend students who remained in the encampment, after they effectively declined an offer from the university to limit discipline. The Hamilton Hall occupation began hours later.

At around 9 p.m. on Tuesday, the police returned to Columbia and began arresting protesters.

How Columbia got here

Since the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas on Israel, American college campuses have been hubs of increased protest and debate. The scene at Columbia has been particularly contentious, with protests drawing hundreds of demonstrators, and some faculty members drawing attention for statements that critics considered to be antisemitic.

Columbia administrators, like their counterparts on campuses across the country, have struggled to fine-tune a response that balances discipline, free speech, academic freedom and institutional and national politics. For example, Columbia suspended two pro-Palestinian student groups after a walkout, and it has rewritten its protest policies, suspended some students and moved to cut or reduce ties to some faculty members.

The university’s approach was the focus of a congressional committee hearing on April 17. Over more than three hours in Washington, Dr. Shafik and other Columbia leaders tried to placate Republican lawmakers by acknowledging that they had been unprepared for the tensions of recent months and promising new crackdowns.

Although their answers appeared to please some lawmakers on Capitol Hill, they stirred unrest on campus, where protesters had built an encampment in the hours before Dr. Shafik’s testimony.

Columbia called in the police twice in April.

Less than 24 hours after the hearing adjourned, New York City police officers in riot gear entered the private campus at the request of Dr. Shafik and Columbia leaders. The police swept into the encampment to arrest defiant protesters and dismantle the demonstration, which was calling for the university to eliminate its financial ties to Israel. The authorities reported more than 100 arrests .

Many people welcomed the decision to call in the police to remove the tent protest in mid-April, and said that Dr. Shafik was well within her power to shut down unauthorized protests on private property. But the decision also provoked fresh outcry from students, faculty members, free-speech groups and critics of Israel, who argued that it was counterproductive to shut down a peaceful protest, particularly on a campus that is supposed to be a marketplace of ideas.

By the time many of the critiques rolled in, protesters had already started gathering again, chanting some of the same slogans — “We don’t want no Zionists here” and “Israel is a racist state” — that Dr. Shafik had suggested were creating “a harassing and intimidating environment for many of our students.”

Protesters pitched tents again, but this time the administration sought to negotiate with them.

Within two weeks, however, the negotiations broke down and protesters took over Hamilton Hall, an administrative building that has a long history of student takeovers. Columbia lost patience and brought the police back to campus. Dr. Shafik, in her letter to the Police Department on Tuesday evening, said the university had made its decision “with the utmost regret.”

Some protests unnerved Jewish students

Columbia cannot control what happens off its property, and the neighborhood around its campus has drawn significant attention in the aftermath of the arrests, with some reports of antisemitic harassment. School officials have said much of the incendiary language has come from outside protesters.

“Go back to Poland!” one masked protester who clutched a Palestinian flag shouted outside the Columbia campus gates, according to a video posted on X . Elsewhere online, a Columbia student said protesters had stolen, and then tried to burn, an Israeli flag, and that Jewish students had been splashed with water.

The Columbia chapter of Chabad, an international Orthodox Jewish movement, said that protesters targeted Jewish students with expletives as they left campus.

The White House condemned the episodes of antisemitic protest. A spokesman, Andrew Bates, said that “calls for violence and physical intimidation targeting Jewish students and the Jewish community are blatantly antisemitic, unconscionable and dangerous.”

Elie Buechler, an Orthodox rabbi who works at Columbia, said that campus and city police officers had failed to guarantee the safety of Jewish students “in the face of extreme antisemitism and anarchy" and suggested that the students return home “until the reality in and around campus has dramatically improved.”

That view was not universally shared. Hillel, the Jewish student organization on campus, called for increased security and said it was not urging Jewish students to leave.

Some on-campus activists distanced themselves from the agitators.

“There’s so many young Jewish people who are, like, a vital part” of the protests, said Grant Miner, a Jewish graduate student at Columbia who belongs to a student coalition calling on Columbia to divest from companies connected to Israel.

That group said in a statement, “We are frustrated by media distractions focusing on inflammatory individuals who do not represent us,” and added that the group’s members “firmly reject any form of hate or bigotry.”

Reporting was contributed by Liset Cruz , Colbi Edmonds , Luis Ferré-Sadurní , Erin Nolan , Sharon Otterman and Lola Fadulu .

Alan Blinder is a national correspondent for The Times, covering education. More about Alan Blinder

Our Coverage of the U.S. Campus Protests

U.C.L.A.:  Administrators at the University of California, Los Angeles, called in law enforcement officers  after violent clashes broke out between pro-Palestinian demonstrators and counterprotesters.

Columbia:  Dozens of pro-Palestinian demonstrators were arrested as police officers entered Columbia’s main campus and cleared Hamilton Hall of a group who had occupied the building .

Brown:  In a rare deal, demonstrators dismantled their encampment at Brown after university leaders agreed to discuss divesting funds from companies connected to the Israeli military .

Portland State:  With wood pallets piled at the entrance, dozens of pro-Palestinian activists have been holed up in the university’s library. Here’s a look inside the makeshift fortress .

U.N.C.:  Pro-Palestinian demonstrations at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill turned chaotic  after dozens of students were detained for refusing to leave an encampment.

• International

Nationwide campus protests

What's moving markets today

Protests at Columbia and other schools escalate

Chandelis Duster, Christina Zdanowicz and Lucy Bayly

Follow the latest live coverage about pro-Palestinian protests on US college campuses here.

Rep. Torres: Columbia president “should step aside” if she cannot lead with moral clarity

From CNN's Chandelis Duster

New York Rep. Ritchie Torres, a Democrat, criticized Columbia University President Minouche Shafik, saying she has “chosen to surrender control of Columbia to an antisemitic fringe." Torres also said canceling in-person classes is “an admission of failure” by Shafik.

“If you cannot ensure the safety of your students, then you have no business serving as President of any university, let alone the alma mater of Alexander Hamilton,” Torres said in a statement. “What Columbia University needs is not an appeaser of antisemitism but a leader who will fight with moral clarity against it.”

He continued, “That Columbia University has failed its Jewish students so profoundly is an indelible stain on the soul of the institution. If the President of Columbia University cannot lead with moral clarity, then she should step aside for a true leader who can and will.”

Hakeem Jeffries: Antisemitic rhetoric "unacceptable and deeply disturbing"

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries on Tuesday condemned antisemitism amid ongoing protests at Columbia University and other colleges across the US. 

“The antisemitic rhetoric and intimidation deployed by some students and outside protestors on college campuses in New York City and beyond is completely unacceptable and deeply disturbing,” Jeffries, a Democrat who also represents New York, said in a statement. “Every American has the constitutional right to free speech and peaceful assembly in the public square. However, intentionally targeting Jews or any community on the basis of race, religion or ethnicity, acts of harassment and the use of physical violence will never be tolerated.” 

He also said the effort to crush antisemitism and hatred “is not a Democratic or Republican issue. It’s an American issue that should bind us all together.”

“We will continue to do everything possible to protect the Jewish community during this very fraught moment, fight the cancer of antisemitism and redouble our efforts to bring communities together,” Jeffries said.

Trump says Columbia University made “grave mistake” making classes hybrid amid tense demonstrations on campus

From CNN's Kate Sullivan

Former President Donald Trump said Tuesday he thought leadership at Columbia University made a “grave mistake” in making all classes at its main campus hybrid until the spring semester ends after days of tense demonstrations on campus.

“What's going on with the colleges where they're closing Columbia now? I mean, it's just crazy. Columbia should gain a little strength, a little courage and keep their school open. It's crazy. Because that means the other side wins,” Trump told reporters at Trump Tower as he took a few questions after greeting former Japanese prime minister Taro Aso.

 Trump said, “The people running Columbia have made a grave mistake.”

Barnard students on suspension "no longer have access" to most campus buildings

From CNN's John Towfighi

Barnard President Laura Rosenbury confirmed in a statement yesterday that students on interim suspension "no longer have access to most Barnard buildings."

She said Dean Leslie Grinage is "helping students find alternative housing arrangements when needed."

The statement also said Barnard will consider lifting suspensions for students who have an otherwise clean record and commit to a probationary period.

A Barnard student alleged on X that she was suspended and evicted from housing.

Correction: This post has been updated to correct President Rosenbury's first name. It is Laura.

House Speaker Johnson to visit Columbia University Wednesday

From CNN's Melanie Zanona

House Speaker Mike Johnson will head to Columbia University Wednesday to visit with Jewish students and deliver remarks and hold a press conference “regarding the troubling rise of virulent antisemitism on America’s college campuses,” according to his office.

This comes as pro-Palestinian protests have rocked major American universities, including Columbia. After days of tense demonstrations, Columbia University announced it is  moving to mostly hybrid classes  on its main campus until the end of the semester, April 29.

New York House Republicans have called on Columbia president Minouche Shafik to resign immediately for failing to crack down on the protests.

Students, faculty and staff at University of New Mexico protest in support of Gaza

From CNN's Taylor Romine

Students, faculty and staff at the University of New Mexico started protesting Monday in support of Gaza and have done so peacefully, the university said in a statement Tuesday. 

On Tuesday, "members of our UNM community assembled at the UNM Duck Pond in peaceful protest," the statement said. Some people brought tents and sleeping bags, which is in violation of school policy, and campus police told them citations or arrests would occur if not removed, they said. 

"Police monitored the situation throughout the evening, without incident, and around midnight advised those who were remaining that their tents needed to be taken down or they would be cited," the statement said. "The tents were eventually taken down, with some people remaining at the duck pond."

As of Tuesday, there are about a dozen people at the duck pond with banners and chairs, but no tents, the statement said, and the university continues to monitor the situation. 

"The University is grateful to our entire community for modeling how protests can occur in a way that both upholds freedom of expression and ensures a safe and productive campus environment for everyone," the statement said. 

Students at Columbia University encampment say they plan to occupy until demands are met

From CNN's Omar Jimenez and Taylor Romine

Students occupying the West Lawn at Columbia University said Tuesday they are planning on staying there until the university meets their demands of divestment.

They are asking for a “complete divestment” from anything related to Israel, financial transparency into the university’s investments and amnesty from any disciplinary measures for students participating in the protests.  

“This is what we are here for – calling for an end to genocide and for Columbia to financially divest from the violent Zionist settler entity,” a student who identified themself as W told CNN. 

“We are putting our principles into action, and we plan to continue to do so by being here every day until Columbia divests." 

The group is in negotiations with the university through a legal negotiator, said student organizer Khymani James, who declined to share details of the negotiations.  

When asked about the encampment making Jewish students feel unsafe on campus, W said protesters try their best “to make sure everyone feels safe in the encampment," and their community guidelines “preach and hope for peace continuously.” 

Columbia University officials warn ongoing encampment is in violation of university rules

From CNN's Sara Smart

Columbia University officials warned Tuesday that the ongoing encampment is in violation of university rules — but school leaders have not given specifics on disciplinary actions.

“The safety of our community is our number one priority,” university spokesperson Ben Chang said in a press conference Tuesday afternoon. “That includes the safety of the encampment that continues to grow. We are watching this closely.”

University officials met with student organizers until 2 am ET Tuesday to discuss the situation, Chang said. “Columbia students have the right to protest but they are not allowed to disrupt campus life or harass and intimidate fellow students and members of our community," he added.

Chang said acts of vandalism, reports of harassment and discrimination have all been reported during the ongoing protest.

Officials will not release the specifics of student suspensions as “disciplinary actions continue” on campus.

Please enable JavaScript for a better experience.