Another Article in the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin offers tips for communities in preventing and planning for school violence, as well as practicing plans and conducting drills aimed at combating it. For example, the article calls for developing and practicing emergency response plans that address such specific crises as anthrax scares, bomb threats, bus accidents, and school shootings.

Another document transcribes the school-safety-oriented testimony of a behavioral scientist at the RAND Corporation, Jaana Juvonen, before the California State Assembly Select Committee on School Safety. Noting that bullying or being bullied "is now considered a warning sign of potentially violent students," Juvonen presented a model of violence prevention containing three components: an explicit anti-harassment school policy, instruction for all students on conflict resolution skills, and "case-by-case staff mediation that reinforces both school policy and instruction."

What do you call a school that focuses on academic achievement, emphasizes positive relationships among students and staff, creates ways for students to share their concerns, has a system to refer neglected or abused children, involves families in meaningful ways, and supports students in making the transition to adult life? Rare or even an impossible-to-reach ideal, one might be tempted to answer. But these are several of the characteristics found in safe schools, according to an article in a recent issue of Juvenile justice, the journal of the Justice Department’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. The article also lays out the strategic process for designing a safe school, from developing school/community partnerships to sharing outcomes and making program adjustments. Another article in the same issue outlines school violence matters, featuring a series of charts and graphs that were primarily culled from previous government reports. A final article explains how to develop a conflict-resolution education program in which the students involved resolve the dispute themselves without having a solution imposed on them by other. Tennessee’s experience with such a program is offered as an example.