Jonathan Kassa.
(The following is a Letter to the Editor from North Penn School Board Director Jonathan Kassa. The views expressed within are his own.)
Our community faces a critical community-wide decision about North Penn High School (NPHS) through vote-by-mail and at our usual polls on Tuesday, Jan. 16. A broad spectrum of perspectives exist to influence your decision for a "Yes” or "No” vote. My mentor, Connie Clery, cuts to this truth from hard-earned wisdom: "The best education in the world is useless if a student doesn't survive with a healthy mind and body."
I want to reduce this to one issue: how we invest taxpayer funds to protect our most valuable asset — our students.
The current NPHS is safe, especially due to a comprehensive, proactive strategy grounded in evidence-based, holistic practices, including multidisciplinary behavioral intervention and threat assessment models. Now, the special election provides the rare opportunity to fully renovate a 1960s-era facility to best meet the community’s needs and expectations for a safe, secure and vibrant learning environment for all students, staff, families and guests. The security and emergency evacuation upgrades in a total redesign will eliminate crowding and improve traffic flow, while finally meeting or exceeding Americans with Disabilities Act compliance.
I appeal to you as a parent, neighbor, community member, taxpayer, and school board chair of the Safe Schools Committee. My entire career is based at the nexus of education, evidence-based crime prevention, community-based public safety and security. With a strict focus on school safety and student wellbeing, the next two sections compile independent expertise and research (cited with hyperlinks for further exploration) to help inform our community’s dialog and choice.
"School facilities play a key role in creating a safe school environment. Preparedness and response policies and procedures can be aided by a school facility that is built to respond to specific needs.” — The Association for Learning Environment’s Safe Schools Task Force
Modern Standards of School Safety and Security
Recent questions rightfully raised concern about school safety in a full renovation. Fortunately, decades of research and evolving practices exist on this subject. Only a full renovation brings 21st Century solutions to address serious 21st Century issues. That is why Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) will inform all aspects of a NPHS redesign. CPTED is an architectural philosophy that aims to deter criminal or antisocial behavior through design with a focus on natural surveillance, access control, maintenance, and territorial reinforcement.
Aligned with law enforcement, security and emergency management experts worldwide, the AIA Committee on Architecture for Education established CPTED as "proven an effective tool in augmenting security without increasing a sense of danger implied by obvious barriers.” It also helps to address wider issues of community and mental health so students feel seen, cared for, and known — people feel safer when they can easily see and be seen. Studies find that "excessive security measures have a negative impact on school climate, student functioning, and academic achievement.”
Thus, students feel "more physically safe and psychologically comfortable than designs devoid of CPTED strategies.”
Instead of outdated buildings, open-designed schools reduce risks due to clear sight-lines that increase passive surveillance and staff opportunities for proactive interventions. Modern facilities have windows strategically placed and appropriately secured with bullet-resistant film, as well as the appropriate types of security glazing — i.e. tint — for glass. Extensive research on schools and workplaces supports increased natural light and "bringing the outside-in” spaces that boost improved school climate and positive effects on mental health for students and staff.
Of course, experts also suggest striking a balance with the addition of strategic, secure areas of refuge in an emergency situation, with upgrades that reduce isolated "hard trap” areas with limited egress. A full renovation provides options to quickly lock down, or open, sections of the school by integrating technology solutions from the start of the redesign process. Semi or totally unseen spaces, narrow halls with sharp angles and other mid-20th Century features provide blind spots for conflict, bullying, assault, and in worse case scenarios, hiding or cover for assailants.
This naturally leads us to our next school safety topic.
Corridors, Circulation and Evacuation
As we established earlier, wider corridors minimize conflicts in daily school activity. Currently, the 1971 footprint for the facility, excluding the 1990s era K-Pod addition, was designed for a maximum 2,400 students. Yet, 3,000-plus students traverse NPHS on any given day. In Building Security: A Handbook for Architectural Planning and Design, renowned expert Barbara Nadel lists eight school security Key Program Elements. The top two, in order:
1. Circulation throughout the building, and
2. Hallways, while also including "common areas” and "classroom security” in the list.
Additionally, Nadel recommends a width of 10-to-12 foot corridors, which NPHS architect Dave Schrader, during the December 2023 Community Forum, clarified as an elementary school recommendation and no longer a common practice for high school populations. Designers are directed to clearly indicate how to enter, leave and transit even the most informal spaces and to "carefully trace movement through spaces to avoid bottlenecks.”
For comparison, a core NPHS hall, known as the infamous E-Pod Clog, averages just nine feet wide.
In 2018, a student journalist documented the daily difficulties students face navigating overcrowded hallways built for the prior century’s student capacity:
"Not only are the hallways narrow, there are clogs of students at certain intersections. This then forces anyone who may dare to walk in the opposite direction to squeeze against the wall in a depressingly sluggish single-file line. Another student timed her walk from third floor K-Pod to first floor C-Pod, a similarly daunting trip to make every single day — I was running — [but] despite her best efforts, she was perpetually late, much like me and many other NPHS students.”
Now, imagine a student with disabilities or accommodations traversing NPHS’s halls each day. Next, envision what all students and first responders will likely need to overcome in the rare instance that a hazardous crisis, from tornado to active shooter, occurs. A redesign with safety and security at the forefront of planning supports critical actions and life safety goals.
Closing
Briefing seniors last month, Mr. Nicholson spoke of a modernized NPHS footprint.
"One of the things we are looking to do is to create a four-lane highway system,” he said.
Right-sizing for the proper student capacity serves every individual, every day. A "Main Street” corridor and arteries will improve daily circulation, while reducing the conflict risks and strain on all students in any situation.
A "No” vote will simply preserve the 1971 floor plan and its school safety limitations for decades longer.
"When the opportunity exists to invest in a remodel that enhances school climate, safety and evacuation options, it’s hard to imagine any reputable school safety expert supporting an investment of hundred of millions of dollars to maintain a facility footprint that is trying to serve nearly 1,000 more students than it was originally designed for. Many communities across the nation lack the resources to significantly reset their high school’s security posture. Those that do owe it to their students to approach school safety in the most comprehensive manner possible.”— Jeff Allison, Special Adviser, Safe and Sound Schools
A "No” vote guts the ability to develop a multi-layered 21st century safe schools strategy. It does not mean that the current school is unsafe, or that a refurbished NPHS would not be safer than the current facility. However, a "Yes” vote funds the proper redesign and a total-renovation with security infrastructure, innovation, and best practices at its core.
If the North Penn community wants to protect students to the best of the district’s abilities and its resources allow, a ”Yes” vote on Jan. 16 demonstrates our commitment to this priority for generations of students to follow.
Signed,
Jonathan Kassa
Montgomery Township resident, North Penn School Director
About the Author
Jonathan Kassa is a volunteer North Penn School Board Director and education safety and security expert. He influenced development of Federal Emergency Notification rules and was recognized as a "valuable leader in campus safety” in the 2008 Congressional Record. He also served on an international commission to create standards for campus law enforcement agencies and advises multiple national initiatives for safer schools via improved data, transparency, and policy.
(Editor’s note: North Penn Now received several other "Yes” vote Letters to the Editor, including submissions from area residents Margaret Burns-Burke, Nicole Rounay, and Lansdale Borough Councilwoman Rafia Razzak. Kassa’s was scheduled prior to those submissions, and to avoid an over-saturation of submissions before the special election on Jan. 16, we have made the decision to run only one submission for those who support the referendum and one for those who oppose it. To read the opposition submission, click here.)
