Campus Response to a Student Gunman

Author(s): Kelly J. Asmussen and John W. Creswell

Source: The Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 66, No. 5 (Sep. - Oct., 1995), pp. 575-591
Published by: Ohio State University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2943937
Accessed: 08-04-2015 19:02 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Ohio State University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Higher
Education.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 KellyJ. Asmussen
3t JohnW. Creswell

Campus Responseto a StudentGunman

Withincreasingly frequentincidents ofcampusvi-

olence,a small,growingscholarlyliterature aboutthesubjectis emerg-
ing. For instance,authorshave reportedon racial [12], courtshipand
sexuallycoercive[3, 7, 8], and hazingviolence[24]. For theAmerican
College PersonnelAssociation,Roark[24] and Roark and Roark[25]
reviewedtheformsof physical,sexual,and psychologicalviolenceon
college campuses and suggestedguidelinesfor preventionstrategies.
Roark [23] has also suggestedcriteriathathigh-schoolstudentsmight
use to assess thelevelof violenceon collegecampusestheyseek to at-
tend.At thenationallevel,PresidentBush,in November1989,signed
intolaw the"StudentRight-to-Know and Campus SecurityAct"(P.L.
101-542),whichrequirescollegesand universities to makeavailableto
students, employees,and applicants an annual report on security
poli-
cies and campuscrimestatistics [13].
One formofescalatingcampusviolencethathas receivedlittleatten-
tionis studentgun violence.Recentcampusreportsindicatethatvio-
lentcrimesfromtheftsand burglaries to assaultsand homicidesare on
the riseat collegesand universities [13]. College campuseshave been
shockedby killingssuch as thoseat The University of Iowa [16], The
University of Florida[13], ConcordiaUniversity in Montreal,and the
University of Montreal-Ecole Polytechnique [22]. Incidentssuch as
these raise criticalconcerns,such as psychologicaltrauma,campus
safety,and disruptionof campuslife.Asidefroman occasionalnews-

KellyJ. Asmussenis assistantprofessorof criminaljustice at Peru State College,

and John W. Creswellis professorof educationalpsychologyat the University of
Nebraska-Lincoln.
Journalof HigherEducation,Vol. 66, No. 5 (September/October
1995)
Copyright1995bytheOhio State University Press

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
576 Journalof HigherEducation

paperreport,thepostsecondary literature is silenton campusreactions

to thesetragedies;to understandthemone mustturnto studiesabout
gun violencein the publicschool literature. This literatureaddresses
strategiesforschoolintervention [21, 23], providescase studiesof inci-
dentsin individualschools[6, 14, 15,],and discussesthe problemof
studentswhocarryweaponsto school[1] and thepsychological trauma
thatresultsfromhomicides[32].
A needexiststo studycampusreactionsto violencein orderto build
conceptualmodelsforfuturestudyas wellas to identify campusstrate-
gies and protocolsforreaction.We need to understandbetterthepsy-
chologicaldimensions and organizational issuesofconstituents involved
in and affectedby theseincidents.An in-depthqualitativecase study
exploringthecontextofan incidentcan illuminate suchconceptualand
pragmaticunderstandings. The studypresented in thisarticleis a qual-
itativecase analysis[31] that describesand interprets a campus re-
sponseto a gun incident.We askedthefollowingexploratory research
questions:Whathappened?Who was involvedin responseto theinci-
dent?Whatthemesofresponseemergedduringtheeight-month period
thatfollowedthisincident?Whattheoreticalconstructs helpedus un-
derstandthecampusresponse,and whatconstructs wereuniqueto this
case?

The Incidentand Response

The incidentoccurredon thecampusofa largepublicuniversity in a
Midwesterncity.A decade ago, thiscityhad been designatedan "all-
Americancity,"but morerecently, its normallytranquilenvironment
has beendisturbedbyan increasingnumberofassaultsand homicides.
Some oftheseviolentincidentshaveinvolvedstudentsat theuniversity.
The incidentthatprovokedthisstudyoccurredon a Mondayin Oc-
tober. A forty-three-year-old graduatestudent,enrolledin a senior-
levelactuarialscienceclass, arriveda fewminutesbeforeclass, armed
witha vintageKoreanWar military semiautomatic rifleloaded witha
thirty-round clipofthirty
caliberammunition. He carriedanotherthirty-
roundclip in hispocket.Twentyofthethirty-four studentsin theclass
had alreadygatheredforclass, and mostof themwerequietlyreading
thestudentnewspaper.The instructor was en routeto class.
The gunmanpointedthe rifleat the students,sweptit across the
room,and pulledthetrigger.The gunjammed. Tryingto unlockthe
rifle,he hitthebuttofiton theinstructor's
deskand quicklytriedfiring
it again.Againitdid notfire.Bythistime,moststudentsrealizedwhat
was happeningand droppedto thefloor,overturned theirdesks,and

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CampusResponseto Violence 577

triedto hidebehindthem.Afterabouttwentyseconds,one of thestu-

dentsshoveda desk intothegunman,and studentsran past himout
intothehall and out ofthebuilding.The gunmanhastilydepartedthe
roomand wentout ofthebuildingto hisparkedcar,whichhe had left
running.He was capturedby policewithinthehourin a nearbysmall
town,wherehe lived.Althoughhe remainsincarcerated at thistime,
awaitingtrial,themotivations forhis actionsare unknown.
Campus policeand campusadministrators werethefirstto reactto
theincident.Campuspolicearrivedwithinthreeminutesaftertheyhad
receiveda telephonecall forhelp.Theyspentseveralanxiousminutes
outsidethebuildinginterviewing students to obtainan accuratedescrip-
tion of the gunman.Campus administrators respondedby callinga
newsconference for4:00 P.M. thesame day,approximately fourhours
aftertheincident.The policechiefas wellas thevice-chancellor of Stu-
dentAffairsand two studentsdescribedtheincidentat thenewscon-
ference.That same afternoon,the StudentAffairsofficecontacted
StudentHealth and EmployeeAssistanceProgram(EAP) counselors
and instructedthemto be availableforanystudentor staffrequesting
assistance.The StudentAffairsofficealso arrangedfora newlocation,
wherethisclass could meetfortherestof thesemester.The Officeof
JudicialAffairssuspendedthe gunmanfromthe university. The next
day,theincidentwas discussedbycampusadministrators at a regularly
scheduledcampuswidecabinetmeeting.Throughout theweek,Student
Affairsreceivedseveralcalls fromstudentsand froma facultymember
about"disturbed"studentsor unsettling studentrelations.A counselor
of the EmployeeAssistanceProgramconsulteda psychologist witha
in
specialty dealingwithtraumaand responding to educationalcrises.
Onlyone studentimmediately setup an appointment withthestudent
healthcounselors.The campusand local newspapers continuedto carry
storiesabouttheincident.
Whentheactuarialscienceclass metforregularlyscheduledclasses
two and fourdayslater,thestudentsand theinstructor werevisitedby
two countyattorneys, thepolicechief,and two studentmentalhealth
counselorswhoconducted"debriefing" sessions.Thesesessionsfocused
on keepingstudentsfullyinformed aboutthejudicialprocessand hav-
ingthestudentsand theinstructor, one by one, talk about theirexpe-
riencesand exploretheirfeelingsabouttheincident.By one weekafter
the incident,the studentsin the class had returnedto theirstandard
class format.Duringthistime,a fewstudents, womenwho werecon-
cernedabout violencein general,saw StudentHealth Centercounse-
lors.Thesecounselorsalso fieldedquestionsfromseveraldozenparents
who inquiredabout the counselingservicesand thelevelof safetyon

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
578 Journalof HigherEducation

campus. Some parentsalso called the campus administration to ask

aboutsafetyprocedures.
In the weeks followingthe incident,the facultyand staffcampus
newsletter carriedarticlesabout post-traumafearsand psychological
trauma.The campusadministration wrotea letterthatprovidedfacts
of
about the incidentto the board the university. The administration
also mailedcampusstaffand studentsinformation aboutcrimepreven-
tion.At leastone collegedean sentouta memoto staffabout"aberrant
studentbehavior,"and one academicdepartment chairrequestedand
heldan educationalgroupsessionwithcounselorsand staffon identify-
ingand dealingwith"aberrantbehavior"of students.
Threedistinctly differentstaffgroupssoughtcounselingservicesat
theEmployeeAssistantProgram,a programforfacultyand staff,dur-
ingthenextseveralweeks.The firstgrouphad had somedirectinvolve-
mentwiththeassailant,eitherbyseeinghimthedayofthegunincident
or becausetheyhad knownhimpersonally. This groupwas concerned
about securingprofessional help,eitherforthestudentsor forthosein
thegroupwho werepersonallyexperiencing effectsofthetrauma.The
secondgroupconsistedofthe"silentconnection," individualswhowere
indirectlyinvolvedand yetemotionally traumatized. Thisgrouprecog-
nized thattheirfearswerea resultof the gunmanincident,and they
wantedto deal withthesefearsbeforetheyescalated.The thirdgroup
consistedof staffwho had previously experienceda trauma,and this
incidenthad retriggeredtheirfears.Severalemployeeswereseenbythe
EAP throughout thenextmonth,butno newgroupsor delayedstress
cases werereported.The EAP counselorsstatedthateach group'sreac-
tionswerenormalresponses.Withina month,althoughpublicdiscus-
sionoftheincidenthad subsided,theEAP and StudentHealthcounse-
lors began expressingtheneed fora coordinatedcampusplan to deal
withthecurrentas wellas anyfutureviolentincident.

The ResearchStudy
We beganourstudytwodaysaftertheincident.Our firststepwas to
drafta researchprotocolforapprovalbytheuniversity administration
ReviewBoard.We madeexplicitthatwe wouldnot
and theInstitutional
becomeinvolvedin theinvestigationofthegunmanor in thetherapyto
studentsor staffwho had soughtassistancefromcounselors.We also
limitedour studyto thereactionsofgroupson campusratherthanex-
pand itto includeoff-campusgroups(forexample,television
and news-
paper coverage).This boundingof the studywas consistentwithan
exploratoryqualitativecase studydesign[31], whichwas chosen be-
cause modelsand variableswerenot availableforassessinga campus

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CampusResponseto Violence 579

reactionto a gun incidentin highereducation.In the constructionist

thisstudyincorporated
tradition, theparadigmassumptions ofan emerg-
ingdesign,a context-dependent and an inductivedata analysis
inquiry,
[10]. We also boundedthestudybytime(eightmonths)and bya single
case (the campuscommunity). Consistentwithcase studydesign[17,
31],we identifiedcampusadministrators and studentnewspaperreport-
ers as multiplesourcesof information forinitialinterviews.Laterwe
expandedinterviews to includea widearrayofcampusinformants, us-
inga semistructured interviewprotocolthatconsistedoffivequestions:
Whathas beenyourrolein theincident?Whathas happenedsincethe
eventthatyouhavebeeninvolvedin?Whathas beentheimpactofthis
incidenton the university community? What largerramifications,if
any,existfromtheincident? To whomshouldwe talkto findout more
about thecampusreactionto theincident?We also gatheredobserva-
tionaldata, documents,and visual materials(see table 1 fortypesof
information and sources).

TABLE I
by Source
Data CollectionMatrix-Type of Information

Audio-Visual
Source
Information/Information Interviews Observations Documents Materials

Studentsinvolved Yes Yes

Studentsat large Yes
Centraladministration Yes Yes
Campus police Yes Yes
Faculty Yes Yes Yes
Staff Yes
Physicalplant Yes Yes
News reporters/papers/T.V. Yes Yes Yes
Studenthealthcounselors Yes
EmployeeAssistanceProgramcounselors Yes
Traumaexpert Yes Yes Yes
Campus businesses Yes
Board members Yes

The narrativestructure was a "realist"tale [28], describingdetails,

incorporatingeditedquotesfrominformants, and statingour interpre-
tationsof events,especiallyan interpretationwithintheframework of
organizationaland psychologicalissues. We verifiedthe description
and interpretationby takinga preliminary draftof the case to select
informants forfeedbackand laterincorporating theircommentsinto
thefinalstudy[17, 18]. We gatheredthisfeedbackin a groupinterview
wherewe asked:Is our description of theincidentand thereactionac-
curate?Are the themesand constructswe have identifiedconsistent

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
580 Journalof HigherEducation

withyourexperiences?Are theresomethemesand constructs we have

missed?Is a campusplan needed?If so, whatformshouldit take?

Themes
Denial
Severalweekslaterwe returned to theclassroomwheretheincident
occurred.Insteadoffinding thedesksoverturned, we foundthemto be
neatlyin order;the roomwas readyfora lectureor discussionclass.
The hallwayoutsidetheroomwas narrow,and we visualizedhow stu-
dents,on thatMondayin October,had quicklyleftthe building,un-
awarethatthegunman,too,was exitingthroughthissamepassageway.
Many of the studentsin the hallwayduringthe incidenthad seemed
unawareofwhatwas goingon untiltheysaw or heardthattherewas a
gunmanin thebuilding.Ironicallythough,thestudentshad seemedto
ignoreor denytheirdangeroussituation.Afterexitingthebuilding,in-
stead of seekinga hidingplace thatwould be safe,theyhad huddled
together just outsidethebuilding.None ofthestudentshad barricaded
themselves in classroomsor officesor had exitedat a safedistancefrom
thescenein anticipation thatthegunmanmightreturn. "People wanted
to standtheirgroundand stickaround,"claimeda campuspoliceof-
ficer.Failingto respondto thepotentialdanger,theclass membershad
huddledtogetheroutsidethe building,talkingnervously.A fewhad
been openlyemotionaland crying.Whenaskedabouttheirmood,one
ofthestudentshad said,"Most ofus werekiddingaboutit."Theircon-
versationshad led one to believethattheyweredismissing theincident
as thoughit weretrivialand as thoughno one had actuallybeen in
danger.An investigating campuspoliceofficer was notsurprised bythe
students'behavior:
It is not unusualto see people standingaroundafterone of thesetypesof
incidents.The Americanpeople wantto see excitement and havea morbid
curiosity.That is whyyou see spectatorshangingaroundbad accidents.
Theydo notseemto understand thepotentialdangertheyare in and do not
wantto leaveuntiltheyare injured.
Thisdescription corroboratestheresponsereported bymentalhealth
counselors:an initialsurrealisticfirstreaction.In the debriefing
by
counselors,one femalestudenthad commented,"I thoughtthe gun-
man would shootout a littleflagthatwould say 'bang."' For her,the
eventhad been likea dream.In thisatmosphereno one fromthetar-
geted class had called the campus mentalhealthcenterin the first
twenty-four hoursfollowingtheincident,althoughtheyknewthatser-
vices wereavailable.Instead,studentsdescribedhow theyhad visited

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CampusResponseto Violence 581

withfriendsor had gone to bars; the severityof the situationhad

dawnedon themlater.One studentcommentedthathe had feltfearful
and angryonlyafterhe had seen thetelevisionnewscastwithpictures
oftheclassroomtheeveningoftheincident.
Thoughsomeparentshad expressedconcernbyphoningcounselors,
the students'denial may have been reinforced by parentcomments.
One studentreportedthathis parentshad made commentslike,"I am
notsurprisedyouwereinvolvedin this.You are alwaysgetting yourself
intothingslikethis!"or "You did not get hurt.What is the big deal?
Justlet it drop!"One studentexpressedhow muchmoretraumatized
he had been as a resultof his mother'sdismissalof theevent.He had
wantedto havesomeonewhomhe trustedwillingto sitdownand listen
to him.

Fear
Our visitto theclassroomsuggesteda secondtheme:theresponseof
fear.Still postedon the door severalweeksafterthe incident,we saw
thesignannouncingthattheclass was beingmovedto anotherundis-
closed buildingand thatstudentswereto checkwitha secretary in an
adjoiningroomaboutthenewlocation.It was inthisundisclosedclass-
room,twodaysaftertheincident, thattwostudentmentalhealthcoun-
selors,thecampuspolicechief,and twocountyattorneys had metwith
studentsin theclassto discussfears,reactions,and thoughts.Reactions
of fearhad begunto surfacein thisfirst"debriefing" sessionand con-
tinuedto emergein a secondsession.
The immediatefearformoststudentscenteredaroundthethought
thattheallegedassailantwouldbe able to makebail. Studentsfeltthat
theassailantmighthave harboredresentment towardcertainstudents
and thathe wouldseekretribution ifhe made bail. "I thinkI am going
to be afraidwhenI go back to class. Theycan changetherooms,but
thereis nothingstoppinghimfromfindingoutwherewe are!" said one
student.At thefirstdebriefing sessionthecampuspolicechiefwas able
to dispelsomeofthisfearbyannouncingthatduringtheinitialhearing
thejudge had deniedbail. This announcement helpedto reassuresome
studentsabout theirsafety.The campuspolicechiefthoughtit neces-
saryto keepthestudents informed ofthegunman'sstatus,becausesev-
eralstudentshad calledhisofficeto saythattheyfearedfortheirsafety
ifthegunmanwerereleased.
Duringtheseconddebriefing session,anotherfearsurfaced:thepos-
sibilitythata different
assailantcould attacktheclass. One studentre-
actedso severely to thispotentialthreatthat,accordingto one counse-
lor, since the Octoberincident,"he had caughthimselfwalkinginto

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
582 Journalof HigherEducation

class and sittingat a deskwitha clearshotto thedoor. He was begin-

ningto see each classroomas a'battlefield."'In thissecondsessionstu-
dentshad soundedangry,theyexpressedfeelingviolated,and finally
began to admitthattheyfeltunsafe.Yet onlyone femalestudentim-
mediatelyaccessedtheavailablementalhealthservices,eventhoughan
announcement had beenmadethatanystudentcouldobtainfreecoun-
seling.
The fearstudents expressedduringthe"debriefing" sessionsmirrored
a moregeneralconcernon campusaboutincreasingly frequentviolent
acts in the metropolitan area. Priorto thisgun incident,threeyoung
femalesand a malehad beenkidnappedand had laterbeenfounddead
in a nearbycity.A university footballplayerwho experienceda psy-
choticepisode had severelybeatena woman. He had latersuffered a
relapseand was shotbypolicein a scuffle. Justthreeweekspriorto the
Octobergun incident,a femaleuniversity studenthad been abducted
and brutallymurdered,and severalotherhomicideshad occurredin
thecity.As a studentnewsreporter commented, "This wholesemester
has been a violentone."

Safety
The violencein thecitythatinvolveduniversity studentsand thesub-
sequentgunincidentthatoccurredin a campusclassroomshockedthe
typicallytranquilcampus.A counseloraptlysummedup thefeelingsof
many:"When the studentswalkedout of thatclassroom,theirworld
had becomeverychaotic;it had becomeveryrandom,somethinghad
happenedthatrobbedthemoftheirsenseofsafety." Concernforsafety
becamea centralreactionformanyinformants.
Whenthechiefstudentaffairsofficer describedtheadministration's
reactionto theincident, he listedthesafetyofstudentsin theclassroom
as hisprimary goal,followedbytheneedsofthenewsmediafordetails
aboutthecase, helpingall studentswithpsychologicalstress,and pro-
vidingpublicinformation on safety.As he talkedaboutthesafetyissue
and the presenceof guns on campus,he mentionedthata policywas
underconsideration forthestorageof gunsused by studentsforhunt-
ing.Withinfourhoursaftertheincident,a pressconference was called
duringwhichthepresswas briefednot onlyon thedetailsof theinci-
dent,but also on the need to ensurethe safetyof the campus. Soon
thereaftertheuniversity administration initiatedan informational
cam-
paign on campussafety.A letter,describingthe incident,was sentto
theuniversity boardmembers.(One board memberasked,"How could
such an incidenthappenat thisuniversity?") The StudentAffairsOf-
ficesenta letterto all studentsin whichit advisedthemof thevarious

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Campus Responseto Violence 583

dimensionsof thecampussecurity officeand of thetypesof servicesit

provided.The Counselingand PsychologicalServicesof the Student
Health Centerpromotedtheirservicesin a colorfulbrochure,which
was mailedto studentsin thefollowingweek. It emphasizedthatser-
viceswere"confidential, accessible,and professional."The StudentJu-
diciaryOfficeadvised academic departments on variousmethodsof
dealingwithstudentswho exhibitedabnormalbehaviorin class. The
weeklyfacultynewsletter stressedthatstaffneededto respondquickly
to any post-traumafearsassociatedwiththisincident.The campus
newspaperquoted a professoras saying,"I'm totallyshockedthatin
thisenvironment, somethinglikethiswould happen."Respondingto
theconcernsaboutdisruptive studentsor employees,thecampuspolice
department sentplainclothesofficersto sitoutsideofficeswhenever fac-
ultyand staffindicatedconcerns.
An emergency phone system,Code Blue, was installedon campus
onlytendaysaftertheincident.Thesethirty-six ten-foot-tall
emergency
phones,withbrightblueflashinglights,had previously beenapproved,
and specificspots had alreadybeen identified froman earlierstudy.
"The phoneswillbe quitean attention getter,"thedirectorof theTele-
communications Centercommented."We hope theywillalso be a big
detractor[to crime]."Soon afterwards, in responseto calls fromcon-
cernedstudents, treesand shrubbery in poorlylitareas ofcampuswere
trimmed.
Studentsand parentsalso respondedto these safetyconcerns.At
leasttwenty-five parentscalled theStudentHealthCenter,theuniver-
sitypolice,and the StudentAffairsOfficeduringthefirstweek after
the incidentto inquirewhat kind of serviceswereavailable fortheir
students.Many parentshad beentraumatized bythenewsoftheevent
and immediately demandedanswersfromtheuniversity. Theywanted
assurancesthatthistypeof incidentwouldnot happenagain and that
theirchildwas safe on the campus. Undoubtedly, manyparentsalso
called theirchildrenduringtheweeksimmediately followingtheinci-
dent.The studentson campus respondedto thesesafetyconcernsby
forminggroupsof volunteerswho would escortanyoneon campus,
male or female,duringtheeveninghours.
Local businessesprofited byexploiting thecommercialaspectsofthe
safetyneedscreatedby thisincident.Variousadvertisements forself-
defenseclasses and protectiondevicesinundatedthe newspapersfor
severalweeks.Campusand local clubswho offered self-defenseclasses
filledquickly,and new classes wereformedin responseto numerous
additionalrequests.The campus bookstore'ssupplyof pocketmace
and whistleswas quicklydepleted.The campuspolicereceivedseveral

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
584 Journalof HigherEducation

inquiriesby studentswho wantedto purchasehandgunsto carryfor

protection.None wereapproved,butone wonderswhethersome guns
werenot purchasedby studentsanyway.The purchaseof cellulartele-
phonesfromlocal vendorsincreasedsharply.Most of thesepurchases
were made by females;however,some males also soughtout these
itemsfortheirsafetyand protection.Not unexpectedly, the priceof
some productswas raised as muchas 40 percentto capitalizeon the
newlycreateddemand.Studentconversations centeredaroundthepur-
chase of thesesafetyproducts:how muchtheycost,how to use them
correctly,how accessibletheywould be ifstudentsshouldneedto use
them,and whethertheywerereallynecessary.
Retriggering
In our originalprotocol,whichwe designedto seek approvalfrom
thecampusadministration and theInstitutional ReviewBoard,we had
outlineda studythatwould last onlythreemonths -a reasonable
time,we thought,forthisincidentto runitscourse.But duringearly
interviews withcounselors,we werereferred to a psychologist who spe-
cialized in dealingwith"trauma"in educationalsettings.It was this
psychologist who mentionedthe themeof "retriggering." Now, eight
monthslater,we beginto understand how,through"retriggering," that
Octoberincidentcould have a long-term affecton thiscampus.
This psychologist explainedretriggering as a processby whichnew
incidentsof violencewould cause individualsto relivethe feelingsof
fear,denial,and threatsto personalsafetythattheyhad experienced in
connectionwiththeoriginalevent.The counselingstaffsand violence
expertalso statedthatone should expectto see such feelingsretrig-
geredat a laterpointin time,forexample,on theanniversary date of
theattackor whenevernewspapersor televisionbroadcastsmentioned
theincidentagain.Theyadded thata drawn-out judicial process,dur-
ing whicha case were"keptalive"throughlegal maneuvering, could
cause a longperiodofretriggering and thereby greatlythwarttheheal-
ingprocess.The fairnessof thejudgmentof thecourtas seen by each
victim,we weretold,would also influencethe amountof healingand
resolutionoffeelingsthatcould occur.
As of thiswriting, it is difficult
to detectspecificevidenceof retrig-
geringfromtheOctoberincident,butwe discoveredthepotentialcon-
sequencesof thisprocessfirsthand by observingtheeffects of a nearly
identicalviolentgun incidentthathad happenedsome eighteenyears
earlier.A graduatestudentcarrying a riflehad entereda campusbuild-
ingwiththeintention ofshootingthedepartment chairman.The student
was seekingrevenge,because severalyearsearlierhe had flunkeda

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Campus Responseto Violence 585

coursetaughtbythisprofessor. Thisattempted attackfollowedseveral

yearsof legal maneuversto arrest,prosecute,and incarcerate thisstu-
dent,who,on morethanone occasion,had triedto carryout his plan
buteach timehad beenthwarted byquick-thinking staffmemberswho
would not revealthe professor'swhereabouts.Fortunately, no shots
wereeverfired,and thestudentwas finallyapprehendedand arrested.
The professor who was thetargetof thesethreatson his lifewas se-
riouslytraumatizednot onlyduringtheperiodof theserepeatedinci-
dents,but his traumacontinuedeven afterthe attacker'sarrest.The
complexprocessesof the criminaljustice system,which,he believed,
did not work as it should have, resultedin his feelingfurthervic-
timized.To thisday,the feelingsaroused by the originaltraumaare
retriggeredeach timea gunincidentis reported in thenews.He was not
offeredprofessionalhelpfromtheuniversity at anytime;thecounseling
serviceshe didreceiveweresecuredthrough hisowninitiative. Eighteen
yearslaterhisentiredepartment is stillaffectedin thatunwrittenrules
fordealingwithdisgruntled studentsand forprotecting thisparticular
professor'sschedulehave beenestablished.
Campus Planning
The questionof campus preparednesssurfacedduringdiscussions
withthepsychologist abouttheprocessof"debriefing" individualswho
had beeninvolvedin theOctoberincident[ 19]. Considering howmany
diversegroupsand individualshad been affected bythisincident,a fi-
nal themethatemergedfromour data was theneedfora campuswide
plan. A counselorremarked, "We wouldhavebeeninundatedhad there
to
been twenty-five thirty deaths. We need a mobilizedplan of com-
munication.It wouldbe a wonderful additionto thecampusconsider-
ingthenatureoftoday'sviolentworld."It becameapparentduringour
interviews thatbettercommunication could have occurredamongthe
constituents who respondedto thisincident.Of course,one campuspo-
lice officernoted,"We can't have an officerin everybuildingall day
long!" But thethemeof beingpreparedacrossthewholecampuswas
mentionedby severalindividuals.
The lack of a formalplan to deal withsuch gun incidentswas sur-
prising,giventheexistenceofformalwritten plans on campusthatad-
dressedvariousotheremergencies: bombthreats,chemicalspills,fires,
earthquakes,explosions,electricalstorms,radiationaccidents,torna-
does, hazardousmaterialspills,snow storms,and numerousmedical
emergencies. Moreover,we foundthatspecificcampusunitshad their
own protocolsthathad actuallybeen used duringtheOctobergun in-
cident.For example,thepolicehad a procedureand used thatproce-

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
586 Journalof HigherEducation

dure fordealingwiththe gunmanand the studentsat the scene; the

EAP counselorsdebriefed theStudentHealthcounse-
staffand faculty;
lorsused a "debriefingprocess"whentheyvisitedthestudentstwicein
the classroomfollowingthe incident.The questionthatconcernedus
was, whatwould a campuswideplan consistof, and how would it be
developedand evaluated?
As shownin table2, usingevidencegatheredin our case, we assem-
bled thebasic questionsto be addressedin a plan and cross-referenced
thesequestionsto theliterature aboutpost-trauma stress,campusvio-
lenceand thedisasterliterature(fora similarlistdrawnfromthepublic
see Poland and Pitcher[21]). Basic elementsofa cam-
schoolliterature,
pus plan to enhancecommunication acrossunitsshouldincludedeter-
miningwhattherationalefortheplan is; who shouldbe involvedin its
development;how it shouldbe coordinated;how it shouldbe staffed;
and what specificproceduresshould be followed.These procedures
mightincluderespondingto an immediatecrisis,makingthe campus

TABLE 2
EvidencefromtheCase, Questionsfora Campus Plan, and References

EvidencefromtheCase Questionforthe Plan Useful

References

Need expressedbycounselors Whyshoulda plan be Walker(1990);

reacting
Multipleconstituents
to incident
Leadershipfoundin unitswith
theirown protocols
Severalunitprotocolsbeing
used in incident
Questionsraisedby students
reactingto case
Groups/individualssurfaced
duringour interviews
Commentsfromcampuspolice,
centraladministration
Campusenvironment
changed
afterincident
Commentsfromcentral
administration
Issue raisedbycounselorsand
traumaspecialist
Issue raisedbytrauma
specialist
Procedureused by Student
Healthcounselors
developed? Bird et al. (1991)
Who shouldbe involvedin Roark& Roark(1987);
developingtheplan? Walker( 1990)
Should theleadershipforcoor- Roark& Roark(1987)
dinatingbe identified withinone
office?
Should campusunitsbe allowed Roark& Roark(1987)
theirown protocols?
Whattypesof violenceshould Roark(1987);
be coveredin theplan? Jones(1990)
How are thoselikelyto be af- Walker(1990);
fectedbytheincidentto be Bromet(1990)
identified?
Whatprovisions are made for
theimmediatesafetyofthosein
theincident?
How shouldthephysicalenvi- Roark& Roark(1987)
ronmentbe made safer?
How willtheexternalpublics Poland & Pitcher(1990)
(e.g., press,businesses)be ap-
praisedof theincident?
What are thelikelysequelae of Bromet(1990);
psychologicaleventsforvictims? Mitchell(1983)
Whatlong-term impactwillthe Zelikoff(1987)
incidenthave on victims?
How willthevictimsbe Mitchell(1983);
debriefed? Walker(1990)

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Campus Responseto Violence 587

safe,dealingwithexternalgroups,and providing
forthepsychological
welfareofvictims.

Discussion
The themesof denial, fear,safety,retriggering, and developinga
campuswideplan mightfurther be groupedintotwo categories,an or-
ganizationaland a psychologicalor social-psychological responseof
thecampuscommunity to thegunmanincident.Organizationally, the
campusunitsrespondingto thecrisisexhibitedboth a loose coupling
[30] and an interdependent communication. Issues such as leadership,
communication, and authority emergedduringthecase analysis.Also,
an environmental responsedeveloped,because thecampuswas trans-
formedintoa saferplace forstudentsand staff.The need forcentral-
ized planning,while allowingfor autonomousoperationof unitsin
responseto a crisis,calledfororganizational changethatwouldrequire
cooperationand coordination amongunits.
Sherrill[27] providesmodelsof responseto campus violencethat
reinforce as wellas departfromtheevidencein ourcase. As mentioned
by Sherrill,the disciplinaryaction taken against a perpetrator, the
groupcounselingof victims,and the use of safetyeducationforthe
campus communitywere all factorsapparentin our case. However,
Sherrillraisesissuesaboutresponsesthatwerenotdiscussedbyourin-
formants, such as developingproceduresforindividualswho are first
to arriveon thescene,dealingwithnon-students who mightbe perpe-
tratorsor victims,keepingrecordsand documentsabout incidents,
varyingresponsesbased on thesize and natureof theinstitution, and
relatingincidentsto substanceabuse suchas drugsand alcohol.
Also, someoftheissuesthatwe had expectedafterreadingthelitera-
tureabout organizationalresponsedid not emerge.Aside fromocca-
sional newspaperreports(focusedmainlyon the gunman),therewas
littlecampus administrative responseto the incident,whichwas con-
traryto whatwe had expectedfromRoark and Roark [25], forexam-
ple. No mentionwas made of establishinga campus unitto manage
futureincidents-for example,a campusviolenceresourcecenter
reporting of violentincidents[25], or conductingannual safetyaudits
[20]. Aside fromthecampus police mentioning thatthe State Health
Department wouldhavebeenpreparedto senda teamoftrainedtrauma
expertsto helpemergency personnelcope withthetragedy, no discus-
sionwas reportedaboutformallinkageswithcommunity agenciesthat
mightassistin theeventofa tragedy[3]. We also did notheardirectly
aboutestablishing a "commandcenter"[14] or a crisiscoordinator [21],
two actionsrecommended by specialistson crisissituations.

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
588 Journalof HigherEducation

On a psychologicaland social-psychological level,the campus re-

sponsewas to reactto thepsychologicalneedsofthestudentswho had
been directlyinvolvedin the incidentas well as to studentsand staff
who had been indirectly affected bytheincident.Not onlydid signsof
psychologicalissues,such as denial,fear,and retriggering, emerge,as
expected[15], genderand culturalgroupissueswerealso mentioned,
thoughtheywerenot discussedenoughto be consideredbasic themes
in our analysis.Contraryto assertionsin theliterature thatviolentbe-
havioris oftenacceptedin our culture,we foundinformants in our
studyto voice concernand fearabout escalatingviolenceon campus
and in thecommunity.
Facultyon campuswereconspicuously silenton theincident, includ-
ingthefacultysenate,thoughwe had expectedthisgoverning bodyto
takeup theissue of aberrantstudentor facultybehaviorin theirclass-
rooms[25]. Some informants speculatedthatthe facultymighthave
been passiveabout thisissue because theywereunconcerned,but an-
otherexplanationmightbe thattheywerepassivebecause theywere
unsureofwhatto do or whomto ask forassistance.Fromthestudents
we failed to hear thattheyrespondedto theirpost-traumatic stress
with"coping"strategies, such as relaxation,physicalactivity, and the
establishment of normalroutines[29]. Althoughthe issues of gender
and race surfacedin earlyconversations withinformants, we did not
a
find direct discussion of theseissues.As Bromet[5] comments,the
socioculturalneedsofpopulationswithdifferent moresmustbe consid-
eredwhenindividualsassessreactionsto trauma.In regardto theissue
of gender,we did hearthatfemaleswerethefirststudentsto seek out
counselingat theStudentHealthCenter.Perhapsour"near-miss" case
was unique. We do not knowwhatthe reactionof thecampusmight
havebeen,had a death(or multipledeaths)occurred;although,accord-
ingto thetraumapsychologist, "thetraumaof no deathsis as greatas
ifdeathshad occurred."Moreover,as withanyexploratory case analy-
sis,thiscase has limitedgeneralizability [17], althoughthematicgener-
alizabilityis certainlya possibility.The factthatour information was
self-reported and thatwe wereunableto interview all studentswhohad
been directlyaffected by theincidentso as to not intervene in student
therapy or the also a
investigation poses problem.
Despitetheselimitations, ourresearchprovidesa detailedaccountof
a campusreactionto a violentincidentwiththepotentialformakinga
contribution to theliterature.Eventsemergedduringtheprocessofre-
actionthatcouldbe "criticalincidents" in futurestudies,suchas thevic-
timresponse,mediareporting, thedebriefing process,campuschanges,
and theevolutionof a campusplan. Withthescarcityof literature on

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Campus Responseto Violence 589

campusviolencerelatedto gunincidents, thisstudybreaksnewground

byidentifyingthemesand conceptualframeworks thatcould be exam-
inedinfuturecases. On a practicallevel,itcan benefitcampusadminis-
tratorswho are lookingfora planto respondto campusviolence,and it
focusesattention on questionsthatneedto be addressedin sucha plan.
The largenumberof different groupsof people who wereaffectedby
thisparticulargunmanincidentshowsthecomplexity ofresponding
to
a campuscrisisand shouldalertcollegepersonnelto theneed forpre-
paredness.

Epilogue
As we conductedthisstudy,we asked ourselveswhetherwe would
have had access to informants ifsomeonehad been killed.This "near
miss" incidentprovideda unique researchopportunity, whichcould,
however,onlyapproximatean eventin whicha fatalityhad actually
occurred.Our involvement in thisstudywas serendipitous, forone ofus
had been employedby a correctional facilityand therefore had direct
experiencewithgunmensuch as the individualin our case; the other
was a University ofIowa graduateand thusfamiliarwiththesettingand
circumstances surrounding anotherviolentincidenttherein 1992.These
experiencesobviouslyaffectedour assessmentof thiscase by drawing
ourattention to thecampusresponsein thefirstplan and to psychologi-
cal reactionslikefearand denial. At thetimeof thiswriting, campus
discussionshave been held about adaptingthein-placecampusemer-
gencypreparednessplan to a criticalincidentmanagementteamcon-
cept.Counselorshavemetto discusscoordinating theactivitiesofdif-
ferent of
unitsin theevent anotherincident, and thepoliceare working
withfacultymembersand department staffto helpidentify potentially
violence-prone students.We havetheimpression that,as a resultofthis
case study,campus personnelsee the interrelatedness and the large
numberofunitsthatmaybe involvedin a singleincident.The anniver-
sarydate passed withoutincidentor acknowledgment in the campus
newspaper.As forthe gunman,he is stillincarceratedawaitingtrial,
and we wonder,as do someofthestudentshe threatened, ifhe willseek
retributionagainstus forwritingup this case if he is released.The
campusresponseto theOctoberincidentcontinues.

References
1. Asmussen,K. J."WeaponPossessionin PublicHighSchools."School Safety(Fall
1992),28-30.

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
590 Journalof HigherEducation

2. Bird, G. W., S. M. Stith,and J. Schladale. "PsychologicalResources,Coping

Strategies,and NegotiationStylesas Discriminators of Violencein Dating Rela-
tionships." FamilyRelations,40 (1991),45-50.
3. Bogal-Allbritten, R., and W. Allbritten.
"CourtshipViolenceon Campus: A Na-
tionwideSurveyof StudentAffairsProfessionals." NASPA Journal,28 (1991),
312- 18.
4. Boothe,J. W., T. M. Flick, S. P. Kirk,L. H. Bradley,and K. E. Keough."The
Violenceat Your Door," ExecutiveEducator(February1993),16-22.
5. Bromet,E. J. "MethodologicalIssues in the Assessmentof TraumaticEvents."
Journalof AppliedSocial Psychology, 20 (1990), 1719-24.
6. Bushweller, K. "GuardswithGuns." TheAmericanSchool Board Journal(Janu-
ary 1993),34-36.
7. Copenhaver,S., and E. Grauerholz."Sexual Victimization amongSororityWom-
en."Sex Roles: A Journalof Research,24 (1991), 31-41.
8. Follingstad,D., S. Wright,S. Lloyd,and J. Sebastian."Sex Differences in Moti-
vationsand Effectsin DatingViolence."FamilyRelations,40 (1991), 51-57.
9. Gordon,M. T., and S. Riger.The Female Fear, Urbana and Chicago: University
of IllinoisPress,1991.
10. Guba, E., and Y. Lincoln."Do InquiryParadigmsImplyInquiryMethodologies?"
In QualitativeApproachesto Evaluationin Education,editedby D. M. Fetter-
man. New York:Praeger,1988.
11. Johnson,K. "The Tip of theIceberg."School Safety(Fall 1992),24-26.
12. Jones,D. J. "The College Campus as a Microcosmof U.S. Society:The Issue of
RaciallyMotivatedViolence."The UrbanLeague Review,13 (1990), 129-39.
13. LegislativeUpdate. "Campuses Must Tell Crime Rates." School Safety(Winter
1991),31.
14. Long, N. J. "Managinga ShootingIncident."Journalof Emotionaland Behav-
ioral Problems,1 (1992), 23-26.
15. Lowe, J. A. "What We Learned: Some Generalizationsin Dealing witha Trau-
maticEventat Cokeville."Paperpresentedat theAnnualMeetingoftheNational
School Boards Association,San Francisco,Calif.,April4-7, 1987.
16. Mann,J. Los AngelesTimesMagazine,2 June1992,pp. 26-27, 32, 46-47.
17. Merriam,S.B. Case StudyResearchin Education:A QualitativeApproach.San
Francisco:Jossey-Bass,1988.
18. Miles,M. B., and A. M. Huberman.QualitativeData Analysis:A Sourcebookof
New Methods.BeverlyHills,Calif.:Sage Publications,1984.
19. Mitchell,J."WhenDisasterStrikes." Journalof Emergency Medical Services(Jan-
uary 1983),36-39.
20. NSSC Reporton SchoolSafety."PreparingSchoolsforTerroristic Attacks."School
Safety(Winter1991),18-19.
21. Poland,S., and G. Pitcher.CrisisIntervention in theSchools. New York:Guilford
Press,1992.
22. Quimet,M. "The Polytechnique Incidentand ImitativeViolenceagainstWomen,"
SSR, 76 (1992), 45-47.
23. Roark,M. L. "HelpingHighSchool StudentsAssessCampus Safety."TheSchool
Counselor,39 (1992), 251-56.

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Campus Responseto Violence 591

24. . "Preventing Violenceon College Campuses."Journalof Counselingand

Development,65 (1987),367-70.
25. Roark,M. L., and E. W. Roark."Administrative Responsesto CampusViolence."
Paper presentedat theAnnualMeetingof theAmericanCollegePersonnelAsso-
ciation/NationalAssociationofStudentPersonnelAdministrators. Chicago,15- 18
March 1987.
26. "School Crisis:UnderControl"(1991). (?/2"VHS cassettetape) NationalSchool
SafetyCenter,A partnership of PepperdineUniversity
and theUnitedStatesDe-
partments ofJusticeand Education.
27. Sherill,J. M., and D. G. Seigel(eds.). Respondingto Violenceon Campus.New
DirectionsforStudentServices,No. 47. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass, Fall 1989.
28. Van Maanen, J. Tales of theField. Chicago and London:The University of Chi-
cago Press,1988.
29. Walker,G. "Crisis-Carein CriticalIncidentDebriefing."Death Studies,14(1990),
121-33.
30. Weick,K. E. "EducationalOrganizationsas LooselyCoupled Systems."Adminis-
trativeScience Quarterly, 21 (1976), 1- 19.
31. Yin, R. K. Case Study Research,Design and Methods,NewburyPark, Calif.:
Sage Publications,1989.
32. Zelikoff,W. L, and I. A. Hyman."PsychologicalTraumain theSchools:A Retro-
spectiveStudy."Paper presentedat theAnnualMeetingof theNationalAssocia-
tionof School Psychologists, New Orleans,La., 4-8 March 1987.

This content downloaded from 196.43.134.181 on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:02:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions