WHAT THE EXPERTS SAY....
IMPROVING EDUCATION FACILITIES SAFETY WITH CLEAR COMMUNICATION AHEAD OF MARTYN’S LAW Comment by JOSH DEAN, CEO, Audiebant
Y
outh violence is a growing issue in UK schools, universities and colleges. In February in England, a student was arrested after stabbing another student in Sheffield. North of the border, 44% of the NASUWT members in Scotland reported experiencing physical abuse or violence in the last 12 months. Without preventative action, these high-stress environments will push teachers towards industrial action or even cause them to leave the sector.
Among the steps being taken to deal with the issue is the introduction of Martyn’s Law. Currently undergoing scrutiny in UK Parliament before its introduction, it will impose requirements on any premises with a capacity of 200 or more people to increase their preparedness and protection from an attack, which could include students with knives, gang violence, people in a mental health crisis or those with grievances that are not tied to a specific ideology. Specifically, the bill will require education institutions to develop procedures and plans to deal with threats. The incorporation of tools such as mass communication systems could also be implemented to help protect staff and students. But many educational institutions currently lack transparent, effective communication, meaning people are unsure of the right action to take during an incident. Schools, colleges and universities must now review their policies and procedures in preparation for the bill’s introduction.
Ensuring clear communication In educational settings, people instinctively know from an early age how to act when a fire alarm sounds. But it’s less likely that students and staff know what to do in response to a different type of threat. In an attack situation for example, the broadcast of a single, inflexible sound or message gives no indication as to the action needed.
Education facilities are also struggling with an inability to differentiate emergency messaging across different areas. The same inflexible message across different buildings or floors could even put staff and students in danger by inadvertently directing them towards threats and away from safe exits. As Martyn’s Law approaches, how are the appropriate responses ensured from the people on their sites?
24
www.education-today.co.uk April 2025
Tailored messaging is essential to help keep students and staff safe. Zoned capabilities allow for different instructions to go to different areas of a site at the same time. For example, if an attacker is outside the site’s gates, a site-wide lockdown to keep people safely inside may be the best option. But in the case of a threat coming from within, such as the school grounds or a specific building, the safest strategy might be instructing some people to evacuate the area to escape the danger, while others stay put in a safe space.
Zoned mass communication systems are also intuitive to use for authorised personnel. Staff can initiate a critical broadcast from an easily accessible device on an app or a computer. AI text-to-speech capabilities simplify the process and ensure a clear, concise message is sent as soon as possible. Alongside audio, tailored messages can also be distributed to staff and students via visual screen alerts and mobile applications.
Combined with a comprehensive and thorough incident response plan that is constantly rehearsed and tested, educational settings can prepare for Martyn’s Law and empower staff to confidently respond to threats.
Protecting students, staff and visitors
As the introduction of Martyn’s Law draws closer, education facilities must take proactive steps to strengthen their preparedness for safety messages. A well-rehearsed response plan, supported by clear and adaptable communication, will be essential in ensuring staff and students know how to act in an emergency. By implementing zoned mass communication systems, precise tailored instructions can be provided to different areas. This technology will be crucial in preventing confusion and reducing risk. ‘The responsibility now lies with educational institutions to review their existing policies and procedures, and invest in solutions that enhance preparedness.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48
