Armed Assailant Drills in Schools: Best Practices to Prioritize Student & Staff Experience

In recent years, many school districts have faced increasing pressure to conduct armed assailant or “active shooter” drills. While preparedness is essential, how these drills are conducted matters just as much as whether they occur at all. Poorly planned or overly realistic drills can unintentionally cause psychological harm, disrupt learning environments, and erode trust with students and staff.

To help schools navigate this complex issue, three nationally recognized organizations—the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP), the National Association of School Resource Officers (NASRO), and Safe and Sound Schools—jointly authored Best Practice Considerations for Schools in Active Shooter and Other Armed Assailant Drills (updated 2021). This guidance reflects extensive research and on-the-ground experience in school safety, mental health, and crisis response.

Preparedness Without Harm

One of the biggest takeaways from the guidance is simple: drills should prepare people, not traumatize them.

There’s a common misconception that drills need to feel “real” to be effective. In reality, the authors make it clear that highly realistic or surprise drills—think fake gunfire, actors, or simulated chaos—can do more harm than good. In fact, there’s no research showing that those types of drills improve student safety outcomes. What is supported by research are calm, nonsensorial drills that focus on clear procedures and trusted adult leadership.

Lockdown Drills as the Foundation

The guidance emphasizes that traditional lockdown drills should remain the core of school-based armed assailant preparedness. When done correctly, these drills are straightforward and predictable: doors locked, lights off, students out of sight, and quiet until further instruction.

Importantly, these drills should always be announced ahead of time, communicated clearly to families, and conducted without any role-playing or simulated violence. When schools take this approach, lockdown drills can function much like fire drills—focused on safety skills rather than fear.

A Developmentally Appropriate Approach

Another key point the authors stress is developmental appropriateness. Children understand danger through the behavior of the adults around them. If staff are calm and confident, students are far more likely to feel safe and respond appropriately.

For younger students, drills should focus on simple concepts like listening to teachers and staying safe. Older students may be able to understand more about safety decision-making, but at no point should students be expected to confront an assailant or “act heroically.” The guidance is very clear: Students are not first responders.

Avoiding Unannounced and Surprise Drills

If there’s one recommendation that stands out most clearly, it’s this: armed assailant drills should never be unannounced.

Unlike fire drills, surprise armed assailant drills can trigger panic, physical injury, and lasting emotional distress. The authors point to real incidents where students believed drills were real, fled buildings, or contacted parents fearing for their lives. For schools with a history of trauma, the risks are even higher.

Transparency matters. When schools communicate clearly about drills—what they are, when they’ll happen, and what they will involve—students and staff can focus on learning the procedures instead of reacting in fear.

Mental Health Must Be Central to Planning

A major theme throughout the guidance is the role of school-employed mental health professionals. Psychologists, counselors, and social workers should be involved from the very beginning—helping plan drills, train staff to recognize trauma responses, and support students and staff during and after drills.

Preparedness efforts that overlook mental health considerations risk undermining trust and safety in the school community. The guidance strongly encourages schools to make emotional well-being a core part of any safety planning.

Collaboration, Communication, and Continuous Review

The authors also remind schools that armed assailant drills are just one piece of a much bigger picture. Schools should weigh how much time, energy, and resources they devote to these drills compared to other safety priorities—like mental health supports, threat assessment, and prevention efforts.

Ultimately, effective preparedness is about balance: being ready without being reactive, informed without being frightening, and prepared without causing harm.

A Responsible Path Forward

The guidance from NASP, NASRO, and Safe and Sound Schools offers a clear path forward for districts navigating this sensitive topic. When schools approach armed assailant drills thoughtfully—prioritizing communication, developmental appropriateness, and mental health—they can strengthen safety while preserving the trust and well-being of their communities.

Preparedness doesn’t have to be scary. Done right, it can be empowering.

Citation

National Association of School Psychologists, National Association of School Resource Officers, & Safe and Sound Schools. (2021). Best practice considerations for schools in active shooter and other armed assailant drills. National Association of School Psychologists.