What should we know about temporary door locking devices?

Classroom barricade devices, which are added to existing classroom door openings, are not compliant with the model fire codes and building codes used in most U.S. states.

These codes, designed to ensure the safety of building occupants, require door hardware that allows free egress, meets the accessibility standards and does not negatively impact fire protection. In order for other locking methods to be allowable by code, the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) must approve any devices or the code must be modified. Even if a local code change is made, some devices may not meet the federal requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

The reasoning behind proposed changes is often based on the misconception that barricading the door is the only way to protect classroom occupants. There are code-compliant locks readily available from many lock manufacturers that provide the needed security without compromising safety in favor of lower cost. While locks address one aspect of classroom security requirements, there are other factors to consider, such as the door, frame, glass, key distribution, communication and lockdown procedures.

An additional concern is the potential for an unauthorized person to install the barricade device and secure the classroom in order to commit a crime. Once in place, many of the devices currently on the market restrict all access from the outside, preventing a staff member or emergency responder from entering the room to help. Before considering the use of classroom barricade devices, a consultation with legal counsel is advised in order to understand any liability issues that may exist.

This article originally appeared in the College Planning & Management September 2016 issue of Spaces4Learning.

About the Author

Lori Greene, DAHC/CDC, CCPR, FDAI, FDHI is the manager of Codes & Resources with Allegion.

Featured

  • Can AI Help Build Stronger Communities in Student Housing?

    Student housing success is shifting from operational performance to student experience, with belonging now at the center. A recent 2025 report underscores a growing emphasis on student well-being, community, and engagement, signaling that expectations now extend beyond logistics to ensure students feel supported in their living environments. AI is enabling that shift by reducing administrative workload and giving teams more time to focus on meaningful student engagement.

  • Higher Ed is Betting on New Buildings While Quietly Undermining Their Campuses — Here’s Why

    In this climate, the owner’s representative has changed from a delivery-focused advisor to a strategic campus partner. Institutions are increasingly relying on owner’s reps not just to manage, cope, schedule, and budget, but also help evaluate whether a project should proceed at all.

  • Spaces4Learning Launches 2026 Facilities and Construction Brief Survey

    Spaces4Learning recently launched the 2026 Facilities and Construction Brief Survey, which collects data on the previous year’s K–12 and higher education construction projects nationwide.

  • Designing for Every Mind

    Learning environments have the power to shape not just what students know, but who they become. When a school is designed with genuine empathy—for the full range of ways students think, sense, and engage with the world—it becomes more than a building. It becomes a catalyst for growth, confidence, and belonging. That is the animating idea behind neurodiverse design, and it is one that is transforming how more architects and designers are thinking about school design.