By Michelle Cummings and Daniel Dean
January 19, 2024
Recently, we studied the independent investigation conducted by Guidepost Solutions, LLC, in reference to the school shooting at Oxford High School in Michigan on November 30, 2021. Four students were murdered, and seven other people were injured. This study was roughly a 550-page document that covered every detail of the shooting. The purpose of this article is to address the significant failures that greatly impacted this tragedy.
Overall, the school’s physical security measures were adequate. They had an SRO and an armed security guard at the school. There were a few critical problems with the communication equipment at the school; however, the biggest failure occurred within their policies. Guidepost Solutions, LLC found the district, “…failed to provide a safe and secure environment.” (Guidepost, 2023)
Here’s a quick recap of the events that led up to the shooting, according to the Guidepost Oxford Community Schools Independent Report on the Shooting at Oxford High School on November 30, 2021 (Guidepost Solutions, 2023):
November 29, 2021 – 1st period. The teacher observed the shooter, a 15-year-old male, looking at pictures of ammunition on his phone. The teacher reported their observations to the Restorative Practices/Bullying Prevention Coordinator, the Dean of Students, and a School Counselor.
The Restorative Practices Coordinator reviewed the shooter’s disciplinary records and contacted the counselor to find out what he knew about the shooter. The counselor only remembered two prior interactions with the shooter. One conversation was in reference to his grades the prior year and the other was in response to a mental health concern mentioned by a teacher. The counselor also recalled the shooter being sad regarding the death of his dog. Additionally, the Restorative Practices Coordinator looked at the shooter’s grades for the semester and did not notice any dramatic changes. However, if she had looked at the grades for the past three weeks, she would have seen a very different story. There was a dramatic drop off in the shooter’s performance in recent weeks.
The shooter was called to the office to meet with the Restorative Practices Coordinator and the counselor. The shooter explained that he had been to the shooting range with his mother recently and was looking at ammunition in relation to this hobby. The shooter’s demeanor was described as, “calm, compliant, and remorseful”. The shooter was warned that it was not appropriate to view content related to ammunition or guns while at school. The shooter was then sent back to class.
Later that day, the first period teacher sent a picture of an index card that the shooter had turned in during the first week of class. It included a drawing of a man holding a gun, which had been erased but could still be seen. The notified staff did not view this drawing as a threat and therefore, the principal nor the SRO were notified.
November 30, 2023 – 1st Period – The teacher observed the shooter watching a video of a violent shooting in class. This occurred the day after being warned about inappropriate material being viewed at school. The teacher notified the same group of staff as the day before and the shooter went to his 2nd period class.
2nd Period – The teacher noticed the shooter’s math worksheet had a gun, bullets, and what appeared to be a body that had been shot twice and was bleeding. He had also written the following statements: “The thoughts won’t stop”, “Help me”, “My life is useless”, “The world is dead”, and “Blood everywhere”. The teacher took a picture of the worksheet and immediately carried it to the Dean of Students.
The counselor then went to the classroom and brought the shooter to the office along with the worksheet, which had been altered. The drawings and statements were crossed out and they were replaced with the following statements: “I love my life so much” and “OHS rocks”.
The Dean of Students and the counselor questioned the shooter about the worksheet. He became quiet, appeared sad, and told them about the recent death of a grandparent and dog. He also mentioned a fight with his parents the prior night. The shooter also explained how he struggled during the Covid pandemic shutdown. The shooter told the counselor he was not a danger to himself, but the counselor later stated that he wasn’t convinced that was true. The Dean of Students later stated, “We asked the parents to come up to meet at the school because we didn’t feel like it was safe to send him back to class based on the statements he wrote on the paper.”
While waiting on the parents, the Dean of Student’s went to the shooter’s classroom and retrieved his backpack. What they did not know was the gun and ammunition, that was later used in the shooting, was in the backpack.
When the parents arrived, the counselor told them the shooter needed mental health support. The parents stated they could not take him there that day because they had to return to work. The counselor gave them contact information for mental health support and stated he would be following up with the parents. The parents then asked if the shooter could remain at school; the Dean of Students and the counselor agreed. He was sent back to class along with his backpack.
At 12:51:12 p.m., the shooter came out of the bathroom and began shooting. Four students were murdered, and seven other people were injured. This particular shooting was 100% preventable. The goal of this article is to point out the policy/procedure failures and how to improve them to prevent this from happening in the future.
There is not one person, other than the shooter, who is solely responsible for this horrific event; however, multiple things could have been done differently to prevent this tragedy.
The school board had a threat assessment policy, but it was never formally introduced to the schools. The policy was publicly posted on their website, but it was sent out as a policy change in a mass email along with nearly two dozen other policies. Additionally, training was not conducted with faculty and staff.
On November 29, 2021, the shooter’s actions wouldn’t have triggered the threat assessment or suicide threat assessment team. The events on November 30, 2021, are different. If the faculty and staff at Oxford High School had followed the policy that existed (but was not implemented), this tragedy could have been avoided.
- First, the shooter would have never been sent back to class that day.
- The parents wouldn’t have had the option to leave the shooter at school.
- The backpack would have been searched. The school system’s burden to conduct a search is different than the police conducting a search. The police must have “probable cause” to search. The school system only has to have “reasonable suspicion”. The definition of reasonable suspicion is, “any reasonable person would suspect that a crime was in the process of being committed, had been committed or was going to be committed very soon.” With the information they had on November 30, 2021, there was more than enough “reasonable suspicion” to conduct a search.
- In a deposition, the security officer at OHS testified that the school conducted at least 10 searches per year for vapes and drugs. To give contrast, there is much less reasonable suspicion on vape/drug searches, that are routine.
- The statements on the math worksheet, standing alone, were enough to trigger a suicide threat assessment, but didn’t.
Our schools must do a better job implementing policies that protect our children. Just making the policies is not enough. They must be put into action and the faculty and staff must be trained. Training is not a one-time event it is an ongoing process.
In the past, schools, businesses, and other organizations have used the argument that attacks like this were not foreseeable. Before Columbine, that may have been the case. Times have changed and the number of these horrific acts continues to multiply. These acts are now definitely foreseeable and not taking every action possible to prevent them is negligent.
Implementing a threat assessment and suicide threat assessment policy is not difficult yet needs to be done in every school. It includes: “forming a multidisciplinary threat assessment team, establishing a central reporting mechanism, identifying behaviors of concern, defining the threshold for law enforcement intervention, identifying risk management strategies, promoting safe school climates, and providing training for stakeholders” (National Threat Assessment Center. 2018.).
Every school should have an in-depth site security assessment conducted by an outside contractor. Some police departments will conduct free security assessments for schools, but police officers cannot devote the time needed for a thorough assessment. These assessments cover your environmental security, physical security, electronic security, and procedural security. Depending on the size of the facility, they can take weeks to complete. This is the first and arguably the most important step in increasing the safety and security of your school.
In closing, while the school had adequate physical security measures, their policies and procedures were lacking. Although a policy was in place, it was never implemented into the individual schools. If the threat assessment/suicide assessment policy had been followed this tragedy would not have occurred. Ongoing training and policy review processes must be a critical priority in every school in order to see a decline in these horrific attacks in the future.
Guidepost Solutions. (2023, October 30). Oxford Community Schools Independent Report On The Shooting At Oxford High School On November 30, 2021. [PDF]. https://oxfordresponse.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FINAL-REPORT-OCS_Investigation.pdf
National Threat Assessment Center. (2018). Enhancing school safety using a threat assessment model: An operational guide for preventing targeted school violence. U.S. Secret Service, Department of Homeland Security.
