Worldwide, violence among students has not only remained among the school management but also to all stakeholders in the education sector.  It has evolved over the years to take different form from one generation to another as student engage in different affairs in their studies. The most common type is the student to student victimization and bullying. In most cases student in lower educational status find themselves being subjects of their senior counterparts. One would face a scenario where a student tin senior class would force a junior either directly or indirectly, perform a task that would ordinary be his/hers or engage in any other activity against his/her will. Studies has proved that the act is common in all educational institutions regardless of the locality and status, the only difference lies on the actual type of the act being carried out. It also cut through all genders to include violence in girls’ schools. More particularly girls are known to engage in psychological battle with their juniors as opposed to a boy school where the act is more physical.

In Early 2013, Dorothy Espelage, Eric M. Anderman, Veda Evanell Brown, Abraham Jones, Kathleen Lynne Lane, Susan D. McMahon, Linda A. Reddy and Cecil R. Reynolds released a study on titled Understanding and Preventing Violence Directed against Teachers. It pointed out the area to be ignored by many writers over time but remain a demanding area that needs to research. They revealed a different violence that was never thought of; between teachers and students. They derived numbers to support the seriousness of the study, stipulated the manner in which these offenders should be treated and the right measures to be put in place to prevent the act.

Researches in the paper took much effort on the prevalence and prevention recommendation of the paper rather than reasons causing the violence in schools. Although the research seems to focus more on teachers as victims if thought through in relation to the ongoing debate it is creates a different picture. When and how does school violence begin and at what point does it qualify as crime. The victims may remain the same but the offenders and kind of offences have changed. It is agreeable with the research findings that teachers and students are faced by challenges of violence. The recommendations of the research also can play a very vital role in ending violence. However with this recent event is just exposes how many lives are in danger and how the simple school violence can escalate to fatal attacks.

School violence is majorly the mental or bodily harm done to a student or member of staff by colleagues or school mates. However, in most of the school the perpetrators are suspended, sent to special schools, expelled or go unpunished. In most cases they are not punished since the report do not even reach the relevant authorities. In their recommendation on how to prevent the first growing culture Dorothy et al. prefer a three tiers process which comprises class, student and teacher.

Teacher’s intimidation, physical attacks and property destruction which are on an alarming rise are among ways that violence is perpetrated. It is good the NRA have their view on gun control measures but given the rise in school violence the matter should really be closed very fast. Wayne says that allowing the policies proposed by the government would lead to bureaucracy and unfair background checks. This is good for the innocent people who are licensed to have guns but unsafe for students and teachers given the alarming rise of violence and that the perpetrators may continue resorting to deadly weapons.

The report advocates that teachers should be trained on how to predict this kind of behavior and overcome the challenge. It further recommends that training programs should be put in place to empower teachers to predict and handle such behaviors. A three tier approach which includes teachers, level, class level and student level is recommended in order to handle the problem. This is a good approach; however, parenting is the backbone of individual behaviors. As much as this is merely mentioned in community level poor parenting, kind punishment, and laws lead to school violence.

Raising a child in a non violent, good moral environment at home would go a long way in reducing the school violence. The violence directed towards teachers and the other students is generally not stimulated by the victims but it is pain carried on the inside. This is why, nearly half of the victimized teachers reported they had experienced offences from two or more different types of perpetrators when a child at home can talk back to a parent, or use abusive language to the parent they are likely to disrespect other authorities in their life. This kind of behavior is picked up from television programs, celebrity behavior, music industry and other social media activities. A parent is in the best position to prevent such behavior influencing their children’s.

There has been a parallel growth between school violence and drug use in school. This without a doubt shows that the two are related. Drug abuse is the other major cause of school violence and joining of gangs which means if this is dealt with the danger of school violence both to teachers and students will reduce. As they try to focus on what ignites the violence Dorothy et al introduces us to two major categories micro system and macro system. “The macro system may be considered the outermost layer in an individual’s environment. This layer comprises abstract influences such as cultural values, customs, and laws.” The research hardly dwells in this area which is a high trigger of violence anywhere including schools. The increase in use of weapons to attack teachers and students is enabled partly by law and customs. These are also the factors which should fight drug and other substance abuse.