Removing School Resource Officers – A failed experiment

In June this year, the Ottawa Carleton District School Board (OCDSB) voted to “immediately and completely” end its involvement with the School Resource Officers program, where officers are assigned to schools to provide advice and counselling and to deal with any criminal activity.

The following story shows implications of school resource officers elsewhere. Mostly we don’t need to experiment everything ourselves. There is plenty we can learn from the experience of others.

The presence of School Resource Officers (SROs) in schools can have both positive and negative implications. Criminalisation of behaviour was a major concern and reason for removing SROs because SROs in schools can lead to the criminalisation of student behaviour, particularly for students of colour and students with disabilities, who may be disproportionately impacted by the presence of police in schools.

However there are some potential implications of removing SROs from schools include:

  • Increased concerns for safety: A major loss is the SROs help to create a safer environment in schools by providing a visible law enforcement presence, responding to security concerns, and providing training to staff and students on emergency procedures.
  • Losing positive relationships: SROs can develop positive relationships with students, which can help to build trust and cooperation between law enforcement and the community.
  • Loss of Deterrent to crime: SROs can serve as a deterrent to crime and violence in schools by being present and visible.

It’s important to consider these implications when deciding whether to implement or continue a program of SROs in schools, and to make sure that any decision is based on a careful consideration of the context and specific needs of the community. The story from Pomona, California is worth giving a thought:

Also view Los Angeles Times Story here
Post

 

Leave A Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *