From Dr Amar-Singh, Hartini Zainudin, Noor Aziah Awal and 19 others

Recent episodes of school violence reported in the media have sparked national discussion, with many expressing opinions on what long-term actions should be taken.

The government addressed the issue on Friday and proposed several measures.

It is important that these measures are based on evidence – on what actually works – rather than opinions or “in my day” sentiments.

Police presence in schools

Following the Cabinet meeting, government spokesperson Fahmi Fadzil announced that the government is considering leveraging the “omnipresent” nature of the police force.

“This move is aimed at ensuring that police presence in schools serves as a signal that our schools are safe places,” he said.

However, research findings in the US on police presence in schools are mixed.

Some studies indicate reductions in certain types of violence (such as fights, threats, and drug-related activities).

However, most studies suggest that police presence does not make schools safer and is linked to negative consequences for students, including harsh disciplinary actions like suspensions and expulsions.

Evidence also suggests that police in schools can make students feel less safe, increasing anxiety and fear.

A systematic review in the US of 32 studies on school-based law enforcement found no evidence that such measures promote safety, and instead, they tend to criminalise students and schools.

Metal detectors, CCTV in schools

Selangor menteri besar Amirudin Shari has announced plans to introduce metal detectors and install CCTV cameras in affected schools, though it is unclear whether these measures will be expanded throughout the state.

Some evidence shows that while metal detectors may deter or detect weapons, systematic reviews do not confirm that they reduce overall school violence.

A review by the US WestEd Justice and Prevention Centre of studies done over the years indicate little to no impact on violence and suggest that metal detectors can create a negative perception of safety, making some students feel less secure.

While installing CCTV cameras in schools may seem like a sensible move, evidence on its effectiveness is mixed.

Some studies found a modest decrease in crime – mainly reductions in vehicle crimes in car parks – but the impact on violent incidents was generally small and statistically insignificant.

A recent longitudinal study found no measurable effect, and in some cases, students reported feeling less safe under surveillance.

Caning in schools

Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has stated that the government is open to allowing teachers limited flexibility to administer caning under strict guidelines as a means to discipline problematic students.

However, every systematic review and meta-analysis on corporal punishment in schools (including caning) has found that it is ineffective in reducing violence or improving long-term behaviour.

Evidence consistently shows that corporal punishment is associated with negative outcomes, including increased aggression and violence among students.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has strongly stated that corporal punishment in schools is not an effective or ethical method of managing behaviour, causes harm to students, and should be abolished.

The government’s suggestion to reintroduce caning is therefore a regressive step, wholly rejected by research and data.

Ban on devices and social media

The government is also considering banning smartphones for those under 16 and raising the minimum age for social media use to 16.

Anwar noted that social media and online gaming are increasingly influencing children’s behaviour.

We all recognise the profound impact that internet-connected devices and social media have had on society and on children.

While there are benefits, the negative effects – particularly addiction – are significant.

For such a ban to be effective, it would need to include all internet-connected devices, such as tablets and computers.

Current evidence on digital bans shows limited and inconclusive effects on reducing overall school violence.

Some studies indicate that smartphone bans in schools can modestly reduce bullying, but research does not definitively confirm that banning social media or devices for under-16s effectively reduces violence.

Moreover, enforcement would be a major challenge, as such bans can be easily circumvented.

Experts generally recommend harm-reduction approaches – such as comprehensive digital literacy education, resilience training, and emotional regulation – rather than outright bans, which often fail to prepare children for responsible digital engagement.

Tackle real issues

In summary, none of the measures proposed by the federal or state governments are proven to be effective, according to US research papers.

More importantly, these measures focus on symptoms rather than root causes.

To truly address violence in schools, we must tackle the underlying issues: psychosocial and mental health needs, family challenges, school culture, and the failure of social media platforms to protect children.

We must work together to create school environments and communities where students feel safe, supported, and welcomed – not policed.

Civil society stands ready to assist the government in developing evidence-based, practical, and meaningful solutions.

These are our children, and we all share responsibility for their safety and well-being.

This letter was signed by 22 members of civil society. Dr Amar-Singh is a consultant paediatrician, Hartini Zainudin is a child activist, and Noor Aziah Awal is a former Suhakam commissioner.

The views expressed are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.