Adding Security, but Subtracting Safety? Exploring Schools’ use of Multiple Visible Security Measures

School Security Measures and Longitudinal Trends in Adolescents’ Experiences of Victimization

“…Theoretical perspectives offer contrasting expectations about the direction of the relationship between school security and adolescent victimization; some hypothesize that increased security should reduce victimization whereas others suggest that increased security should increase it. Moreover, existing empirical findings lend support to both of these hypotheses (e.g., Gerlinger and Wo 2016, Tanner-Smith et al 2017). To further complicate matters, some scholars have suggested that race is an important consideration when assessing the effects of school security measures (Hirschfield 2010, Wacquant 2001).…”

“…Given the inconsistency in the direction and magnitude of these interactions, more research is needed to understand why race mattered differently for each outcome variable. One possible explanation is that specific types of school security measures may have different effects on specific types of victimization (as in Tanner-Smith et al 2017). For instance, perhaps security measures that focus on surveillance (e.g., security cameras, security guards) are more likely to prevent theft, whereas security measures that focus on maintaining order (e.g., strict dress code, closed campus for lunch) may be more useful for reducing physical altercations.…”

“…Other studies have shown consistently negative effects such that the presence of school security measures was associated with higher levels of victimization. For example, some studies have found that the use of more school security measures is associated with more exposure to drugs, fighting, and property crime (Tanner-Smith et al 2017), disorder, including personal attack and theft (Mayer and Leone 1999; Schreck and Miller 2003; Taylor 2010), and violence and weapon presence (Cuellar 2018; Nickerson and Martens 2008). Still other studies have had mixed findings, where some types of school security measures have a positive relationship with student victimization, others have a negative relationship, and others have no effect at all (Burrow and Apel 2008; Cheurprakobkit and Bartsch 2005; Crawford and Burns 2016; Jennings et al 2011; Sevigny and Zhang 2016).…”

“…Although few studies have empirically assessed this hypothesis, there are some that lend it support. For example, one study found that schools using cameras and security personnel in tandem compared to schools using neither had higher suspension rates for fighting, particularly in schools with larger proportions of non-white students (Tanner-Smith et al 2017). Similarly, Theriot (2009) found that students were arrested for assault and disorderly conduct at higher rates in schools that employed school resource officers, particularly when there was a larger proportion of economically disadvantaged students.…”

“…Moreover, the existing empirical literature provides mixed findings. For instance, some studies have found that schools’ use of multiple security measures is associated with increased rates of victimization (Schreck and Miller 2003; Tanner-Smith et al 2017; Taylor 2010) while others have found the opposite (Gerlinger and Wo 2016). Given the mixed findings, it is possible that there is true heterogeneity in the effect of school security measures on victimization; security measures might influence the experiences of different types of students in different ways.…”