Remove or Keep? Understanding Decisions to Retain or Remove Police From Schools in the Defund the Police Movement

• In Event: A Multidisciplinary Examination of School Resources Officers: Discourse, Policy, and Stakeholders' Perceptions

Abstract

Objective
In 2020, the call to reimagine and defund policing was brought to the forefront of national media after the murder of George Floyd at the hands of police in Minneapolis, Minnesota. This spark led to different public institutions, such as schools to make decisions on how to move forward with police presence in the everyday lives of youth. The purpose of this study seeks to examine the different reasons to remove and keep police in schools in the midst of the broader social movements to defund and abolish police. Through this study, where we conduct a content analysis using news articles we hope to better understand the current national conversation surrounding police presence in schools.

Theoretical Framework.
The motivation for this work is to further understand how the shifting perception and community action surrounding police presence schools differs and remains constant post the murder of George Floyd. Research supports that throughout the country, many SROs serve in a “mixed role” capacity on school campuses as part of the triad model of enforcement, which focuses on SROs being law enforcers, counselors, and educators (Finn, Shivley, McDevitt, Lassiter, & Rich, 2005). Officers serving in these mixed role positions work on campus daily, as opposed to splitting their time on campus and off. However, the triad model of enforcement has not shown statistically significant findings on students’ sense of safety or providing additional benefits to students' learning experiences while in school (Nolan 2011; Theriot 2014). As we shift to the current debate, many community and school leaders from throughout the country are faced with different challenges surrounding school resource officers, specifically if their role is the best fit within their unique learning environments.

Data/Methods
Our study data consist of news articles, school board meeting minutes, official statements, and meeting recordings from May through September 2020 that focused on city, school, or school district decisions to either retain or remove school-based police. We used content analysis to examine the narratives used to justify these decisions to remove, keep, and abstain.

Results
Our initial findings indicate that schools that removed police were largely motivated by two concerns: shrinking budgets and racial justice. Schools that retained police were largely motivated by the desire to make schools safer and felt that police presence aided in overall safety. For schools and districts that are still continuing this conversation and have abstained from making further decisions on police presence within their schools, they discuss the pressing need to learn more about the criminalization that takes place with police being on school campuses and listening to student feedback.

Significance
This study finds that in the aftermath of the police killing of George Floyd, conversations among policymakers nationwide focused on the value of police in schools. Ultimately, local decisions about whether to remove police from schools were mixed, drawing on contrasting narratives about the relative benefits and harms of police. The continued conversation surrounding school police brings more awareness to students' needs and conception of safety in their learning environments.

Authors

• Jeremy Kidd Prim, University of California - Davis

• Benjamin W. Fisher, University of Wisconsin - Madison

• Ivan Benitez, University of Louisville

• Ethan Higgins, University of North Carolina - Wilmington

• Jordan Mayer, University of North Carolina - Wilmington