But Littleton, Colo., changed all that. Last week's shooting spree by two disturbed students, in which 12 youths and one teacher died before the shooters killed themselves, happened in an affluent, mid-sized town. That, on the heels of the numerous school shooting massacres happening outside of urban areas in recent years, suggested that city kids might just be safer after all. However, while educators and psychologists agree that violence is spreading into suburban and rural schools at a faster rate than through their city counterparts, data collected on the question to date presents a confusing picture of which is safest. While violence occurs more often in city schools, for example, and more students may have weapons, kids in towns and rural areas are more likely to use alcohol, tobacco and drugs, according to the U.S. Board of Education.
Experts also disagree on which environment is most conducive to overall safety.
There are school crime statistics to back up almost any viewpoint. City schools have more serious violent crimes like murder, rape or attacks with weapons than do town or rural schools, with 17 percent of schools reporting incidents compared to 5 and 8 percent respectively, the U.S. Board of Education reports. Town or rural schools, however, are more likely to have problems with alcohol, tobacco and drug use, while town students are the most likely to commit robberies of any group. And rural areas are seeing an explosive growth in violence, with much more crime than in the recent past, and with more serious problems, a 1995 study conducted by a group of educational psychologists concluded. Students who feel they differ from the norm may feel rejected or isolated from their peers, as in the Littleton case.