Page 64 - Security Today, May/June 2023

Emergency Preparedness School design is a complicated discipline, especially as more schools opt for increased protections against threats to life safety. Similar to sports arenas, shopping venues, theatres, hotels, and more, schools need to balance being accessible to the general public and providing occupant security. Adding layers of security can help address this challenge in educational settings. While this, of course, varies by district, school, and existing security measures, two common approaches are the outside-in approach (hardening exteriors) and the inside-out approach (creating safe havens). Both methods have their benefits and drawbacks. The limitations of each method can be mitigated when both approaches are used in conjunction. However, given there is not yet a standardized code for building security, designers may not understand how to plan multiple layers of protection to provide an optimal level of security. To contextualize these approaches and establish the value of a multi-tiered approach, it is important to look at what preparations schools have taken since the tragic events of Columbine and examine their effectiveness for on-campus violence. After this, building professionals and school administrators can more clearly understand how designs with multiple layers of protection can be used to best meet their particular needs. How Have Schools Prepared for On-Campus Threats? The 2017 report “Preventing School Shootings: The Effectiveness of Safety Measures” “describe\[s\] and assess\[es\] various measures often implemented as a direct response to a well-publicized school shooting,” such as hiring officers to patrol campuses and installing metal detectors to prevent guns and other weapons from entering schools. While other measures have been taken since 2017, including securing entrances and utilizing monitored access control, those mentioned in the report allow some understanding of the complexity of school security. In terms of effectiveness, both having officers on school grounds and the use of metal detectors present a complicated picture. The effectiveness of officers relies on their ability to build a rapport with students, making them an integral but singular piece to the security Photo Courtesy of Technical Glass Products puzzle. Metal detectors, which have been traditionally limited to “urban, inter-city schools,” also have their own limitations. While this equipment can positively impact school safety, at least seven studies from the past 30 years observe some students will not be deterred by metal detectors. In addition, metal detectors can also contribute to a “prisonlike environment” that works against student retention and success. Both approaches to school security have helped keep students safe. However, they can be enhanced through changes to school building design, specifically when it includes layering several safety and security systems together. Safeguarding from the Outside-In In addition to the aforementioned measures, design-based approaches are becoming an integral part of building safer schools. They help reimagine how schools can be built (or renovated) to provide optimum security. At its most fundamental level, the outside-in approach attempts to prevent access to a school by hardening a building’s exterior with locks and by monitoring points of access like entry vestibules, exterior stairwells, and emergency exits. It also attempts to prevent break-ins by using forced-entry and bullet-resistant materials. When used in entry vestibules and windows, this material is often transparent both to contribute to daylighting goals and to provide a way for occupants to see those approaching the school, providing valuable time to barricade rooms and contact authorities. A benefit of hardening an exterior is that it typically requires fewer resources to improve security compared to inside-out approaches or hiring security guards, making it ideal as a first step in enhancing building security. However, hardened exteriors may not prevent all instances of violence on campuses. Improperly specified systems, which can happen as there is no current codified standard, may not provide the level of security a project needs. But even properly specified systems can be compromised whether by human error or situationally—for instance, if an intruder has a connection to the school and can easily bypass monitors. In these instances, multiple layers of protection can augment the security offered through 20 campuslifesecurity.com | MAY/JUNE 2023