In his
book, Homeroom Security, Aaron
Kupchik describes the effects of strict disciplinary enforcement procedures on
students in several different schools. He finds that restrictive policies in
schools deprive students of their rights and degrade the legitimacy of the
school administrations. One of the most prominent aspects of discipline in
schools is the use of law enforcement officers. Kupchik argues that the
enjoining of the education and justice systems creates an oppressive
environment in which typical youth misbehavior is redefined as criminal action.
As a result, the real motivators behind youth misbehavior are ignored in favor
of following the rules. Although the intent behind installing law enforcement
in schools is to protect youth, police officers may not be the most appropriate
form of security in schools because they focus on criminalizing student
behavior rather than dealing with the psychological or emotional source of
student issues.
Kupchik
finds that the strict treatment of misbehaving youth stems from the training
police officers go through. Whereas conflict resolution is seen as the most
effective way to deal with misbehavior, police are trained to “assert authority
and not back down,” a mentality which prevents them from properly handling
youth whose actions may not purely be based on a propensity for delinquency
(Kupchik 108). As a result, “law enforcement officers are ill-equipped to
respond to students in need of mental health attention” (Sentencing Project).
The problem with viewing youth misbehavior as criminal is a lack of attention
to the sources of such misbehavior. By simply arresting students who break
school rules, police officers fail to address underlying causes such as poor academic
performance, which may result in a student lashing out to divert attention away
from their bad grades (Kupchik 174). School officials are better suited to deal
with issues like this, but because of the presence of law enforcement,
“students are unnecessarily sent to the criminal justice system” (Kupchik 79).
Although
overall violence in schools is decreasing (Sentencing Project), society’s
desire to protect a demographic that it views as “innocent and vulnerable”
results in an overreaction in the form of strict disciplinary and surveillance
procedures (Kupchik 3). While this is meant to protect youth, Kupchik argues
that oppression is a bigger threat than an event like Columbine (Kupchik 82),
and the Sentencing Project finds that schools with a police presence are
actually more prone to violence (Sentencing Project). Combined with the fact
that police are trained to do the exact opposite of what is necessary in
dealing with youth conflict, it is not surprising that law enforcement is not
the best solution to school security.
Sources:
- Aaron Kupchik,
Homeroom Security
- The Sentencing Project, “The
Facts about Dangers of Added Police in Schools” (http://sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/jj_Police%20in%20Schools%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf)
The author, Yu Yat Yang argued in his blog mainly on how having the police in schools could negatively influence the students, which agrees with the Kupchik’s main argument as well. He supports his argument by how the intent of police authority does not actually work out well, the mismatching characteristic of the approaches of police and schools on conflict resolution, and the tendency of more crime in schools with the police presence. All of the points were also argued in Kupchik’s book, and I would argue that the author could have argued more on how the original purpose of police presence in schools, which is school’s security, is not functioning as intended. In his essay, he lacks to argue how students have little right to have voice in how they should be treated when resolving conflicts in school, or how the students perceive punishment or think it is fair, because that was one of the important factors when controlling the delinquency or violations of rules. He could have elaborated more on how schools as institutions along with the police presence are actually paralyzing the rights of the students rather than providing its original purpose, school’s security.
ReplyDeleteIn many regards, the increased presence of law enforcement and surveillance on school campuses was to react and hopefully in the future, prevent future threats such as the tragedy at Columbine. Although this increase presence of law enforcement and surveillance may decrease the risk of a school shooting occurring, it does not completely eliminate the threat. However, this increased security places pressure on law enforcement to identify risk factors of students to possibly prevent these rare occurrences. This may lead to the criminalization of minor offenses usually handled by school officials, which in turn caused youth to be put in a precarious situation where they find themselves continuously acting out. This cycle continues harming many students that would not have otherwise been placed in the juvenile justice system, but does not eliminate all risk of future school shootings. I believe this is why Kupchik believes these security measures are harming the educational environment. The pressure on law enforcement and their training to command authority, leads them to seek risk factors which will point to a group of individuals, many of who may not be dangerous, and places this reinforces institutional distrust from a school age. I believe Kupchik is not advocating for lax enforcement of rules, but focusing on the causes for youth violence, treating those causes, and ensuring safety through appropriate and proportional responses to youth misconduct.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to the essay, Negative Affects of Police Presence in Schools, Yu Yat Yang talks about Kupchik’s idea that strict disciplinary enforcement procedures in schools have side effects that are not taken into consideration. A very important aspect that Yu Yat Yang includes in her essay, that Kupchik argues, is the use of police presence by schools when trying to achieve discipline. YuYat Yang argues that using police presence as a way to discipline kids is ignoring the issue of “why” kids are acting the way they are. She argues that instead, the Police only deal with how to get rid of a certain behavior. As a result, it seems as though the only thing achieved by the use of officers at schools is intimidation and not conflict resolution.
ReplyDeleteSomething that Kupchik mentions in his book is the idea that youth might already be used to these kinds of procedures so it would be kind of difficult to tell how exactly youth is being affected. As Kupchik suggests, youth might just view police presence as a norm and not mind the police presence as much as outsiders think it might. Just like Yu and Kupchik, I agree that the use of police can have very bad effects if the police are not trained to deal with youth and youth related conflicts.
Something that stands out to me that Yu mentions is Kupchik’s idea that youth is viewed as “innocent and vulnerable”. This to me seems odd since it seems as though the worry is protecting youth from youth. Although it might seem as though youth is being protected from harm by police presence, youth is the one being affected by it too. For example, it seems as though parents or school representatives do not view “bad” youth as falling under any kind of protection.
- Karen Ruiz
I think that school disipline is important, obvioulsy, but how the schools are going about it is not going to be as successful as would hoped. I do not think the effect it has on the students will be enough to prevent hurtful things from happening to them now, as well as in their futures. I think that having police on school campuses is not a good idea. I think that students will either develop a lot of resentment towards them for invading on their space, or they will start to not fear police because they will have grown accustomed to them being around all the time. This could be extremely bad in the future lives of the kids because they can become or remain very unrully after they leave their school system. I also agree with the thought of the presence of police taking away from the innocents of the students. It is as if they are being looked at as criminals who have already done something wrong. I thinkt that the school staff need to learn how to control the student population in which they work. I think that something needs to be done within the school system to provent the need of police on campus from being needed.
ReplyDelete