Week 6 Readings - Case study

Equity as safety: (How) Should secondary school boards make use of school resource officers?

Background

  • SROs are police officers either full or part time in schools

  • In charge of identifying risks and assessing them, patrolling, running police support programs, responding to fights and vape incidents …

  • Models from 1990/2000s when North America adopted metal detectors and lock down drills after US school shootings

  • SROs apart of “safe school” program → aimed more to prevent and react quickly to threats rather than repair harm

  • Criticized for making schools feel to much under scrutiny, so schools tried to change how SRO was seen like being youth support such as coaches, counsel…

  • Downsides:

→Black, Indigenous, Muslim and other radicalized students were unfairly stooped, searched and referred to police for nothing serious

→SROs escalate disagreements and vaping into criminal matters = altering school culture and discourage students from seeking help

→SRO approach focuses to much on controlling/punishing threats rather than understating students trauma, background, culture to reduce incidents also calming situations peacefully without using force/punishment

  • Freeze on new SRO programs from 2020-2023

  • Freeze ended in 2024 → police services urged school to bring back SROs without the school needing to pay (covered by police department)

  • June 2025 - Bill 33 enacted → requires every board to work with local police, government can step in and overrule school board if orders are not followed

  • Nothing built into law that if policing harms a student that the school can opt out of having police in school

  • If board wants to use another method (community worker) they must prove it provides same level of safety and minister of ed. Must agree

People:

Blake Mitchell - represents rural Elgin → focus on after hours security in smaller communities “if it prevents one break in its worth it” → recently had car broke into and is skeptical of of police efficacy (bias?)

David Chen - represents downtown London → zero tolerance after stabbing nearby and views SROs as essential deterrents → does not believe in mental heath services for community

Linda Ahmed - long time equity advocate → pushes for restorative practice and will press to strengthen anti racism conditions in SRO agreement

Carina Beauchamp - former teacher → active parent-council member → she’s natural → values student well being but worries about public perception (school is careless/making wrong decision)

Pre work:

  2. Definitions overlap

A) Caring student teacher relationships, inclusion, identity affirmation, professional learning to teachers/administration for cultural safety, family involvement, SISP

B) creation of safe, inclusive, engaging environment - equity for all by removing barriers and discrimination, eliminate threats, integration of police

  1. David Chen will be hardest to satisfy because he does not care for mental health supports therefore doesn’t care for police effect on students mental health. Can be persuaded by using points such as: The use of restorative practices which helps build supportive/better environment and prevention, identity and mental health are linked = identity celebration means positive mental health (TVDSB)