Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to examine police officer perceptions about persons with intellectual disabilities.
Design/methodology/approach
– In this study, 188 officers from three police districts in the Southeast USA were surveyed using a modified Social Distance Questionnaire.
Findings
– Results indicate that the majority of police officers surveyed had little or no training with regard to disabilities and that most are willing to interact socially with individuals with intellectual disabilities. Further, this study found that female officers had significantly greater positive attitudes toward individuals with intellectual disabilities than male respondents and that white respondents were more knowledgeable about these individuals than those from minority backgrounds.
Research limitations/implications
– While these results are significant, it should be noted that the number of female and minority participants was relatively low.
Practical implications
– The paper includes recommendations for professional development for police officer and criminal justice training programs.
Social implications
– As individuals with developmental and intellectual disabilities are increasingly integrated into society, their vulnerability to mishandling by the criminal justice system and police officers intensifies. This paper allows police officers and those within the field of criminal justice an opportunity to examine perceptions as they seek to understand how police and general societal perceptions impact the way that people interact with persons with intellectual disabilities.
Originality/value
– This paper fulfills a need to examine attitudes of police officers toward citizens with intellectual disabilities in the communities in which they live. These attitudes often affect the way that police officers interact with citizens and identify additional training needs to better prepare officers for diverse individuals they may will encounter.
This study contrasted the perspectives of families of American Indian students on discipline issues to the typical classroom management practices of K-12 schools on two rural reservations. In general, school strategies used for behavior improvement focus on individual students and are micro-managed by teachers. Families were concerned that these practices may elicit resistance in children who were raised to evaluate their conduct and self-impose behaviors that meet the standards of the group. Results suggest that American Indian students respond to modeling in a context that supports independence and the practice of humility to facilitate group process.
This manuscript discusses educational practices used in a K-12 reservation school system and speculates how these practices may be culturally insensitive to American Indian students and their families in the community. Focus group discussions were conducted with seven teachers, who were students in a graduate program, and were working on a reservation school located in a rural community in the southwestern United States. The students were queried as a group during class meetings on educational practices. These discussions revealed a list of commonly used teaching methods that are incompatible with this population and reasons for the incompatibility. Since the teachers were familiar with the American Indian culture, they were able to generate a list of culturally responsive educational practices (solutions) to address each problem area. These findings have major implications for this population of students as they have one of the highest special education referral and placement rates of all minority groups.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.