The prevalence of school shootings in the United States underscores an urgent and, so far, unmet need of devising comprehensive measures that protect students, teachers, and staff in education spaces.

While the specifics of those measures are, and ought to be, open to fair debate, the notion that arming teachers is the best answer to preventing recurrences of this type of tragedy is preposterous.

We are already seeing action. State lawmakers across the country have introduced legislation specifically prohibiting classroom teachers from carry guns, such as in New York. And, earlier this week, the Florida state Senate took action to halt the movement toward arming classroom educators. 

Teaching and security enforcement are two different roles. Combining them is impractical and unwise, even if proposed with the best of intentions. The challenges of effective literacy instruction for students are formidable enough. Neither teachers, nor students, should have to wrestle with the distraction of gun-equipped classrooms.

Everyone deserves to feel safe in the classroom. Teachers need to give their full attention and effort to each day’s learning. They need schools unfettered by violence. What we are hearing from our members and other educators is that introducing weapons into the teacher-student relationship shatters any shared sense of safety and security.

Talk to literacy teachers and you will quickly find out how precious a commodity their instructional time is, and how demanding a preparation is required for them to be at their most effective in the classroom. Asking teachers to learn how to use weapons, arm themselves, and undertake security enforcement roles while teaching is not only burdensome, distracting, and education-impairing, it’s downright dangerous.

To place on teachers the additional responsibility of having to use deadly physical force against an armed assailant who has managed to enter school grounds with lethal ordinance distorts and perverts the teaching function. It further puts teachers and students at risk as shown by instances where weapons have accidently or, at times intentionally, been misused.

It also gives would-be assailants the ultimate and undeserved victory of making schools a weapons-based environment.

This is hardly the legacy that teachers and students at schools which have had to contend with episodes of gun violence would wish for. We owe it to them and to ourselves to do much better than that.

The International Literacy Association denounces the very idea of arming classroom teachers. Yes, we should talk about how we can increase safety of school perimeters. Yes, we should talk about resources to help early identification and treatment for mental health issues. And yes, we need better communication and coordination between the agencies we have in place to protect us.

That’s why ILA calls upon government officials, federal and local authorities, and school officials to fashion security measures for the nation’s schools that preserve safe learning spaces by keeping the instruments of violence out of them, save for those possessed by law enforcement officers.

Many commentators on the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School tragedy have noted the maturity and eloquence of the school’s students whom they have spoken with on the air. The students are indeed striking examples of the poignancy and power that literacy education instills.

We’re proud of these students and proud of their teachers. We want to see a solution for school security that supports without diminishing the focused learning opportunities they have enjoyed and leveraged to such an impressive effect.

Marcie Craig Post is the executive director of the International Literacy Association (ILA).