Integrating
Hiring, Training, and Deployment Criteria for School Resource Officers,
School-based Police, and Security Guards into States’ ESEA-Required Bullying,
Restraint, and Suspension Plans
Dear Colleague,
Knowing that schools are microcosms of their communities, and given the
ready availability of cell phones and social media, more and more real examples
of school-based student violence have occurred and “gone viral.” Among the most controversial examples
recently are those involving School Resource Officers (SROs), school-based
police officers, and/or school security staff.
Just last month, a Baltimore school district police officer slapped,
kicked, and swore at a young black man outside a Baltimore high school,
sparking a criminal investigation and cries for federal authorities to
intervene.
Most of us have seen the October, 2015 video of the SRO in South
Carolina who ripped a high school girl from her chair and body slammed her to
the ground after she refused to follow some school rules.
Also in October, 2015, a 14-year-old Texas boy was choked to the floor
by an SRO called in to stop a gym fight.
And in November, 2014, a 52-pound 8-year-old Covington, KY elementary
student- - who suffered from ADHD and PTSD- - was cuffed above the elbows for
about 15 minutes by an SRO because he was having some behavioral difficulties
in his classroom.
Significantly, in testimony in a Seclusions and Restraints Hearing
before the House of Representative’s Committee on Education and Labor, the U.S.
Government Accountability Office reported that there were hundreds of
documented incidents between 1990 and 2009 of school students- - most of them
with disabilities- - who had been forcefully restrained.
Moreover, this report identified 20 cases that ended in death.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
School
Security Personnel in US Schools
According to the 2013-2014 Public School Safety and Discipline
report published by the National Center for Educational Statistics, there are
more than 43,000 SROs and other sworn police officers- - and an additional
39,000 security guards- - working in our country’s 84,000 public schools.
The statement above is telling because there are at least three
different groups of individuals who are responsible for school security besides
a school’s administrators:
* School Resource Officers (SROs) who are typically employed by the
school, and who may or may not be deputized by the local police force.
* Police Officers who are employed by the local police force, and are
assigned to selected schools.
* Security Guards who may be school employees or may be employed by a
privately-owned security company that is under contract with a school.
_ _ _ _ _
Significantly: Relative to
training in education, child and adolescent psychology, cultural sensitivity
and understanding, and student disabilities and mental health, numerous
investigative reports have noted the following:
* According to a November, 2015 article in The Atlantic, only 12
states have laws that specify training requirements for officers who are
assigned or deployed to classrooms. In
looking across these state laws, there are numerous inconsistencies, and many
of these laws do not require training on how to understand and interact with
children and adolescents (in contrast to adults).
* According to Nina Salomon, a
senior policy analyst at the Council of State Governments Justice Center, “All
(police) officers are getting a certain level of training that they’re required
to get as police officers. The
additional training. . . on youth development, on working with youth, on
prevention and de-escalation- - hasn’t typically been received by the majority
of law enforcement that work with youth inside a school building, or that
are called to campus.”
* According to a February 2013 study by Strategies for Youth, in
37 states, police academies spent 1% or less of their total training hours on
juvenile justice issues. In five of
these states, police academies do not require any training focused specifically
on juvenile justice issues. And in all
of these states - - except Tennessee (which does provide specific training for
officers deployed to schools)- - police recruits were not taught how to respond
to children with mental health, trauma-related, or special education-related
disorder or disability issues.
* Founded in 1991, the National Association of School Resource Officers
(NASRO) provides a five-day “Basic SRO Course” and a three-day “Advanced SRO
Course,” along with another three-day “School Security Officer Course.”
Unfortunately, unless required by a
school district, these courses are voluntary. Moreover, a November, 2011 report, Education
Under Arrest: The Case Against Police in Schools, by the Justice
Policy Institute noted that these three or five day courses are unlikely to
offset the law enforcement training and mindset of most school-based police. Critically, most security officers working in
schools are typically former community-based law enforcement professionals- -
with training focused on interacting with criminals, not students.
_ _ _
Given all of this. . . it seems clear that- - on a state
regulatory level- - SROs, school-assigned police officers, and privately
hired school security guards:
* Are inconsistently (or not) regulated relative to qualifications,
training, certification, ongoing professional development, or evaluation;
* Probably have little formal training- - from educators or school
psychologists- - in education and learning, school discipline and classroom
management, and child and adolescent development, mental health, and disabilities;
and
* Approach their jobs more from a law enforcement perspective than a
school management and student self-management perspective.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Additional
Results? The
Disproportionate Treatment of Students
The results of the circumstances above are that more students across the
country are referred to law enforcement at earlier ages, these students then
become involved in the juvenile justice system more often, and a
disproportionate number of students of color and those with disabilities are
being punished, restrained, and arrested.
This last outcome parallels the disproportionality data- - once again,
across the country- - relative to teacher referrals to the office for
discipline and administrator decisions on student suspensions and expulsions.
Indeed, using the most recently available U.S. Department of Education
Office for Civil Rights data from the 2011-21012 school year:
* 27% of all students referred in their schools to law enforcement and
31% of all students arrested were African-American- - even though these
students represented only 16% of the total student enrollment; and
* Students with disabilities accounted for approximately 25% of all
students arrested and referred to law enforcement- - even though these students
represented only 12% of the total student enrollment.
In addition, 75% of students with disabilities were physically
restrained at school, 58% were placed in seclusion or involuntary confinement,
and students with disabilities were twice as likely to be suspended as students
without disabilities.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
A
National and State Call to Action
This past December, Congress reauthorized the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act (ESEA)- - also known as the “Every Student Succeeds
Act” (ESSA). On the whole, this
legislation returns the responsibility for most of the operational facets of
effective school and schooling (as well as school improvement) to every state’s
department of education and its district and school partners.
As part of its legislation, ESEA/ESSA requires states to develop
plans on how they will reduce bullying and harassment, student restraints and
seclusions, and student suspensions and expulsions- - all of which
disproportionately affect students of color and with disabilities.
While a range of factors affect student discipline rates, a number of
studies suggest that the racial and disability-related disparities are not
because these students exhibit more frequent or more serious social, emotional,
or behavioral challenges.
Many times, these students
receive administrative office discipline referrals, suspensions, and expulsions
for minor offenses- - the same minor offenses that classroom teachers and
instructional staff handle by themselves when exhibited by other non-minority,
general education students.
Moreover, many times SROs, school-based police, or security officers are
called in to “respond” to students of color and with disabilities, and their
presence and/or tactics sometimes escalate minor problems into a major crises
or law enforcement events.
_ _ _ _ _
Given the focus of this Blog, then, it is recommended that every
state department of education include an SRO, school-based police, and school
security professional component in their ESEA/ESSA-required bullying and
harassment, student restraints and seclusions, and student suspension and
expulsion plans.
Moreover, the following employment and continuing employment criteria
should be included in those plans. . .
That all school security professionals (whether an SRO,
school-based police officer, or school security guard):
* Have at least a Bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or
university
* Pass at least one 3-credit college or university course (or the
equivalent- - 45 hours) in the following areas:
school-based multicultural processes and practices; child and adolescent
development; child and adolescent abnormal development, mental health, and
disabilities
* Pass the National Association of School Resource Officers’ (NASRO) 40-hour
Basic School Resource Officer training course (or the equivalent) prior
to employment and deployment
[Course Contents: Foundations
of School Based Law Enforcement, Ethics and the SRO, The SRO as a Teacher/Guest
Speaker, Diversity, Understanding Special Needs Students, Social Media, School
Law, The SRO as an Informal Counselor/Mentor, Understanding the Teen Brain, Violence
and Victimization: Challenges to Development, Sex Trafficking of Youth, Effects
of Youth Trends and Drugs on the School Culture and Environment, Threat
Response: Preventing Violence in School Settings, School Safety and Emergency
Operations Plans, Crime Prevention through Environmental Design]
* Pass the NASRO 24-hour Advanced SRO or Supervisor training course (or
the equivalent) within two years of one’s initial employment (this is already a
law in South Carolina)
* Pass a certified training program (3 days minimum) in student conflict
prevention and resolution, de-escalation and nonviolent crisis intervention,
and restraint reduction
* Attend at least 60 hours of ongoing and documented professional
development in the content areas above every five years
* Be registered or certified by their state department of education through
the districts employing them (who are responsible for ensuring that the
above criteria are met) prior to any new employment
_ _ _ _ _
In addition, the following principles and/or practices should be
included in the ESEA/ESSA-required state plans to be implemented at the
district level. . .
That all school security professionals:
* Sign, at the beginning of each year as an addendum to their contract,
a district-developed Job Description that emphasizes that their primary job is
to keep schools safe from threats and not to engage in routine student
discipline situations or events
* Respond to the directions of classroom teachers (when in the
classroom) and administrators (when in the common areas of the school) if asked
to be involved in non-threat situations
* Respond to the directions of administrators, when present, during high
potential or actual active threat situations; and follow the School Crisis Plan
when administrators are not present during actual active threat situations
* Be standing and active members of their school’s School
Discipline/School Climate Committee, as well as its School Crisis Team
* Know and understand the District’s Student Code of Conduct, while also
participating in any initiatives related to decreasing disproportionality and
increasing interventions for students with social, emotional, and behavioral
challenges
* Know, understand, and participate in the school’s positive discipline,
motivation and accountability, teasing and bully prevention, student behavioral
incentive, and parent and community outreach systems and activities
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Summary
This blog message has called for a more planned, comprehensive, and
psychoeducationally-relevant process of hiring, preparing, deploying,
integrating, and supervising SROs, school-based police, and school security
guards.
When properly trained and integrated into a district or school’s
positive and preventive discipline, behavior management, and student
self-management system, these professionals are important additional resources
that help keep students, staff, and schools safe, positive, and secure. At the same time, their primary job is to
keep schools safe from threats, and not to become involve in routine student
discipline situations.
This latter point is especially important as many minor school
discipline offenses could technically meet the statutory requirements for some
non-violent community-based misdemeanors.
In the end, school staff and administrators should be fully responsible
for and responsive to these minor discipline offenses, as well as the vast
majority of the significant offenses that are in most districts’ Codes of
Conduct. And in most cases, the SROs,
school-based police, and school security guards should take the lead of the
school administrators and staff.
Critically, we need to remember that these professionals are working in
schools. They need to understand and
conform to the culture of the school and the educational process. We will lose this culture and process if a
“police mentality” becomes the prevailing mode of thought and operation in our
classrooms.
_ _ _ _ _
I
appreciate everyone who takes some of their professional and personal time to
read and reflect on my thoughts. My goal
in writing this Blog is to critically analyze current research, practice, and
implementation in our districts, schools, and classrooms, while using a “common
sense” empirical and experiential approach to help make them meaningful.
I also appreciate everything that you do as educational
leaders in our country. And I always
look forward to YOUR thoughts and comments.
Feel free to contact me at any time. Let me know how I can help your state,
regional cooperative, district, or school to move to the next level of
excellence.
Feel free to forward
this Blog link to your colleagues.
Best,
Howie
