School police officers' roles: The influence of social, developmental and historical contexts

Abstract

Amid national protests over police brutality, debates over law enforcement in schools have been reignited. Though research has focused on the consequences of police presence in schools, few studies have investigated the roles of school police officers (SPOs) and whether the larger contexts influence them. Using a bioecological framework ( Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2006 ), we examined how historical, social and developmental contexts shape SPOs' views of their roles and the challenges and opportunities they encounter. Nineteen 90-min focus groups with 45 SPOs from one large school police department were conducted. Analysis revealed that SPOs perceived their roles as multifaceted, encompassing both formal (e.g., law enforcer, educator) and informal (e.g., confidante, counselor) roles. These roles were enacted differently depending on the school level and neighborhood context. Furthermore, the challenges and opportunities SPOs reported were also contextualized emerging from changes in school policies, the rise in technology and social media and increased professionalization of their police department. Implications for theory and research as well as for training and policy are discussed.

Recommending Reform: A Critical Race and Critical Policy Analysis of Research Recommendations About School Resource Officers

“…. and youth ‘acting out’” (Ghavami et al, 2021, p. 13). Finally, others recommended training specific to the roles and responsibilities of different actors within the school (Lopez, 2019), addressing bullying (Paez & Colvin, 2021), and training on youth development more generally (Fisher & Devlin, 2020; May & Higgins, 2011; Snow et al, 2021; Stinson & Watkins, 2014; Theriot, 2016).…”

“…Although most majoritarian recommendations addressed role definition and/or training, there were other types of majoritarian recommendations, including recommendations to increase transparency of the work of SROs and school police (Anfara & Theriot, 2011; Coon & Travis, 2012; Daniels et al, 2011; Eklund et al, 2018; Ghavami et al, 2021; Sullivan & Hausman, 2017); to address criteria by which officers are selected to work in schools (Fisher & Devlin, 2020; Granot et al, 2021; May et al, 2012; Zirkel, 2019); and to change the way SRO job performance, satisfaction, and evaluations are measured (Fisher et al, 2022; Kelly & Swezey, 2015; Stinson & Watkins, 2014). As with role definitions and training, these recommendations for transparency, hiring, and evaluation were usually made in response to identified negative impacts of SROs and demonstrated crafting recommendations for improving shortcomings of officers rather than ending their use altogether.…”