100% agree on that.
Now for the more complex answer to the other part of the post…
While I certainly do support allowing authorized staff to investigate and resolve a false alarm in any building, delayed evacuation is a bigger ask: there could be a compelling case for it in some cases but it should only be implemented after carefully assessing the building’s other fire protection features (e.g. compartmentation, sprinklers), and ensuring there’s proper procedures and staffing in place to investigate an alarm, and ensuring the proper voice message(s) are configured.
Schools are not the only type of occupancy to show interest in this.
Another variation of this could be a horizontal equivalent of a typical high-rise setup (in other words, compartmentation: dividing the building into several areas and only evacuating the area where the alarm originated.)
Of course, those examples all use a voice-evacuation system. Many older schools only have horn/strobes. If the PA system can meet requirements for coverage and backup power, a possible solution for these buildings could include replacing the horn/strobes with remote strobes and wiring the alarm audio into the PA system. Here’s a mention of a building that did this: Fire Alarms in Buildings (2.0) - #213 by weatherdan882002
Another option, in theory, could be non-voice notification used in conjunction with the PA system. This setup is common in Singapore (generally using bells), however, their code includes requirements for PA system coverage. (This video also shows the importance of not putting objects like trash cans below a shutter. If the shutter can’t close, the benefits of compartmentation provided by the shutter are lost.)
