JPRC

Systematic Review of Research on the Effects of School-Based Law Enforcement

School Safety

Systematic Review of Research on the Effects of School-Based Law Enforcement

by

High-profile incidents of gun violence in schools across the country have escalated demand from parents, teachers, policymakers, and school leaders for stronger school safety interventions. School-based law enforcement (SBLE) has become a standard intervention, growing steadily over the past several decades. However, a new report, co-written by the JPRC team with Professor Ben Fisher of the University of Wisconsin, indicates this strategy has not demonstrated effectiveness. Published by the international Campbell Collaboration, the review summarizes 32 evaluations that looked at any outcomes of SBLE implementation related to crime and behavior, perceptions of safety, and learning outcomes. Results indicate that SBLE presence is linked with an increase in school crime and behavior problems and is associated with increases in school discipline.

“Schools aiming to enhance safety might benefit by shifting resources away from using school-based law enforcement,” said Fisher, the study’s lead author. “Instead, investing in evidence-based strategies, such as school climate improvement designed to prevent problematic behaviors and improve school safety, could yield more positive outcomes.”

The following findings challenge the notion that SBLE contributes positively to students’ overall safety and well-being.

Key findings:

• There was no demonstrated reduction in crime and violence.

• Consistent with other research, SBLE was associated with an increase in exclusionary discipline such as out-of-school suspension.

• There was mixed evidence on whether SBLE makes students and staff feel safer, but this was based on very few studies.

“This study highlights the need for a thoughtful and evidence-based approach to school safety,” said JPRC Director and study co-author Anthony Petrosino. “For schools currently utilizing school-based law enforcement, we recommend a careful examination to ensure that the model has no harmful effects on students, such as exclusionary discipline—and is genuinely providing safety benefits for students and staff.”

Research and Evaluation on School Safety: Perceptions of State School Safety Center Supports and Services

by

Few empirical studies exist on SSSCs. The NIJ funded the JPRC to conduct an evaluation to address this gap. Two prior reports from this project have been issued: States’ School Safety Centers: A Brief Look into History, Characteristics, and Activities; and Research and Evaluation on School Safety: The Structure, Services, and Products of State School Safety Centers.

The recently released third report summarizes the research that JPRC conducted to better understand the structure, services, and perceptions of SSSCs to identify promising practices and models for replication, expansion, and evaluation. This report uses data from interviews with key education leaders involved in school safety efforts in each state who engage with their states’ SSSC services, as well as a survey of superintendents and principals in states with an SSSC.

Key Insights:

  • Awareness of SSSCs: The majority of district and school leaders were aware of their SSSCs, but there is an opportunity to further expand awareness to principals and teachers.
  • SSSCs assume primarily a guidance role: Online resources, training, and technical assistance are the most used SSSC supports.
  • Participants and interested parties have positive perceptions of SSSCs: Services are rated as easy to access, useful, comprehensive, high quality, and aligned with safety needs. However, there may be an opportunity for improvement in ensuring that services align seamlessly with state safety requirements and encompass best practices.
  • There are opportunities for improvement: Feedback from surveys identified areas for possible improvements, including increasing staff capacity; improving websites; increasing outreach; and adding new supports for threat assessment, mental health, and leadership trainings.

Should Schools Be Conducting Lockdown Drills?

by

Although the COVID-19 pandemic closed schools and directed attention to other matters, one issue which had raised concern prior to the pandemic — the role of lockdown drills in schools — remains to be addressed as education leaders prepare for the return of students and adults to gathering daily in large groups in schools.

By one estimate, 95 percent of U.S. schools perform lockdown drills as part of their emergency response plans each year. Their widespread use has been one response to calls for improved safety and security in schools, as the drills aim to help prevent future attacks or, in the event that one occurs, to minimize the loss of life.

Nonetheless, calls to end the use of lockdown drills have been raised, often based on concerns about their effects on the safety and psychological well-being of students and adults who participate.

Despite the widespread use of lockdown drills, research on the impact of such practices is sparse. Nonetheless, the question of whether to end the practice of lockdown drills should be decided based on evidence. Accordingly, this research brief summarizes arguments for and against lockdown drills, as well as available research and best practices, to provide better context to address questions about the use of such drills in schools.

Research and Evaluation on School Safety: The Structure, Services, and Products of State School Safety Centers

by

Common vehicles used to maintain an organized and consolidated effort at the state level to address school safety are State School Safety Centers (SSSCs)—providing a wide range of services to enhance school security.

This report, funded by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), is the second in a series that highlights findings from an evaluation of SSSCs. Given the lack of information about the structure and functionality of SSSCs across the country, the report provides insights from in-depth interviews with SSSC directors to examine the school safety landscape in their states, the history and structure of the centers, the services offered by the centers, and the centers’ accomplishments and challenges.

Key findings include the following:

  • Most state legislation guiding SSSCs is focused on emergency management.
  • SSSCs utilize various staffing models and staff with expertise aligned with state legislation requirements.
  • SSSCs likely need diverse funding sources to conduct their work.
  • Most SSSCs provide many services remotely.
  • State legislation and SSSC operations play a role in shaping services

States’ School Safety Centers: A Brief Look Into History, Characteristics, and Activities

by

State school safety centers (SSSCs) aim to provide a wide range of services to enhance school security. Still, more information is needed to understand how the centers should operate and what factors determine their success.

In 2021, the WestEd Justice & Prevention Research Center received funding from the U.S. National Institute of Justice to conduct one of the first empirical studies of SSSCs. This brief is based on an online survey that asked key informants in each state to assess the history, characteristics, and activities of state school safety centers (SSSCs). Key findings include:

  • Over 65% of respondents reported that their state has or has had an SSSC, and over 96% reported that the SSSC was still operational
  • A majority (62%) of SSSCs have been established in the last decade
  • Over 65% of respondents reported that their SSSC was started in response to state legislation, with 28% attributing the creation to a response to incidents of violence in schools
  • Over 70% of currently operational SSSCs were reported to be situated within larger state agencies
  • A large majority of respondents indicated that their SSSC was funded by state and/or federal funds
  • Over 75% of respondents reported that their SSSC had 10 or fewer staff