students

The author describes important considerations when assessing students’ threats made at schools. In recent articles, M. Reddy et al. (2001) presented four approaches to assessing the risk of school violence. Three commonly used approaches was submitted with an alternative 4th approach suggesting a more logical alternative approach that should be taken more into consideration when assessing threats in school violence. The 1st approach is Behavioral profiling- assessing students behavior, physical, demographics, personality, and likelihood of committing a crime. I don’t agree with using this approach because student are or may be profiled due to race or ethnicity, religious belief and etc. The 2nd approach is Guided professional judgment- also known as structured clinical assessment when professionals interview students using instruments or a checklist for students who may be potential to commit violence. I don’t agree with this method because no actual studies have been completed to show the significance of risk factors for targeted school violence. 3rd Automated decision making- actuarial formulas and expert systems and artificial intelligence systems are used to determine the risk of schools based violence. I for one believe that this approach method shouldn’t be used because of the lack of human control using artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence can help alleviate the difficulties faced by man but intelligent machines can never be 'human'. The final approach is Threat assessment approach- it uses all facts that presented. The threat assessment approach illustrates that no student should be singled out because there’s no such thing as a type, it analyze the distinction of making a threat and posing one and because targeted violence is not a radon act it’s a possibility that it can be prevented. According to NASP “Effective threat assessment must be conducted by a team of trained professionals as part of a comprehensive school safety program and