A mixed‐methods analysis of averted mass violence in schools: Implications for professional school counselors

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine how recent incidents of planned mass violence in high schools within the United States were successfully averted. Using the Averted School Violence database, this study utilizes a mixedmethods content analysis approach to analyze 82 incidents of averted mass violence in high schools that occurred post-Columbine era. The following three themes were identified: attack motives and logistics, plot discovery, and attack aversion. Implications for professional school counselors in preventing similar mass violence attacks in the future are discussed, including fostering trusting relationships between students and adults, providing education to parents about social media platforms and proper firearms storage, establishing threat assessment teams, and educating parents, students, and school personnel about warning signs for violence.

An evaluation of completed and averted school shootings

“…Although it had been the original intent to examine all eight types of warning behaviors, leakage was the only category documented consistently in the ASV database. Unsurprisingly, leakage is the most commonly demonstrated warning behavior ( 23 , 24 , 29 ) in both completed ( 11 , 23 ), and averted school shootings ( 16 , 20 ). Specifically, “Leakage Warning Behavior” is defined as any instance when a perpetrator discloses their plan to carry out a school shooting to persons who are not the intended target(s).…”

“…Although there is debate about how to define school shootings ( 14 ), the definition adopted by the Averted School Violence (ASV) Project is among the most common and consistently used in other investigations ( 3 , 15 , 16 ). An averted school shooting is defined as “a planned school attack, with or without the use of a firearm, that was prevented either before or after the perpetrator’s arrival on school grounds, and before any injury or loss of life occurred.” Cases are classified as completed if there was at least one injury [( 17 ), p. 7].…”

“…Despite being unable to predict who will complete a school shooting ( 11 ), what is clear is that perpetrators, for the most part, are not entirely inconspicuous. They often display warning behaviors before carrying out their plan ( 11 , 16 , 21 , 22 ). Warning behaviors fall into eight categories: Leakage (told someone) , Pathway (planning and preparation) , Fixation (preoccupation with a person or a cause) , Identification (taking on a “warrior mentality”) , Novel Aggression (novel act of violence unrelated to the target) , Energy Burst (increased frequency/variety of behaviors toward the target) , Last Resort (violence out of desperation) , and Directly Communicated Threat (telling targets of their intention to harm them; for more information, see ( 23 )).…”

An exploration of K–12 school shooting threats in the United States.

“…Prior research has explored the dynamics of averted school shootings (e.g., Cowan et al, 2022; Madfis, 2020; National Threat Assessment Center, 2021; Rocque et al, 2022) and with funding support from the Community Oriented Policing Services office, the National Police Foundation (2021) maintains an Averted School Violence (ASV) database of completed and ASV narratives from across the country. However, incidents of violence on school grounds not related to the school, cases where the motive or intent to carry out targeted school violence are unclear, and social media threats not deemed credible by law enforcement are excluded from the database.…”

Developing Practical Responses to Social Media Threats Against K–12 Schools: An Overview of Trends, Challenges, and Current Approaches

“…Recent studies of averted school shootings largely confirm the relevance of many of these risk indicators for school-based threats. An analysis of 82 incidents of averted mass violence in K-12 schools found that most would-be attackers engaged in detailed planning prior to their intended attack, for instance, by conducting internet searches for bomb-making instructions or gathering details about assault weapons and other gear used in past mass attacks (Cowan et al, 2022). Many also developed lists of specific individuals to target during the attack and demonstrated an interest in previous mass violence incidents (Cowan et al, 2022).…”