Students, Security, and Race

• Citation: Vol. 63 No. 1
• Publication year: 2013

Students, Security, and Race

Jason P. Nance

STUDENTS, SECURITY, AND RACE

Jason P. Nance^*

ABSTRACT

In the wake of the terrible shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, our nation has turned its attention to school security. For example, several states have passed or are considering passing legislation that will provide new funding to schools for security equipment and law enforcement officers. Strict security measures in schools are certainly not new. In response to prior acts of school violence, many public schools for years have relied on metal detectors, random sweeps, locked gates, surveillance cameras, and law enforcement officers to promote school safety. Before policymakers and school officials invest more money in strict security measures, this Article provides additional factors that should be considered. First, drawing on recent, restricted data from the U.S. Department of Education, this Article presents an original empirical analysis revealing that low-income students and minority students are much more likely to experience intense security conditions in their schools than other students, even when taking into account neighborhood crime, school crime, and school disorder. These findings raise concerns that such inequalities may continue or worsen as policymakers provide additional funding for security measures. Second, this Article argues that strict security measures do not support long-term solutions needed to effectively prevent school violence. Indeed, strict security measures may exacerbate the underlying problems by creating barriers of adversity and mistrust between students and educators.

[Page 2]

In addition, this Article offers recommendations to address the disproportionate use of security measures on low-income and minority students and to curb violence more effectively. It urges school officials and policymakers to support programs that build trust and collective responsibility instead of providing grants for strict security measures. Further, it recommends that the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights play a more active role in addressing the disproportionate use of strict security measures on minority students.

INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................3

I. THE CURRENT STATE OF THE LAW.........................................................7

A. The Foundational Cases.................................................................8
B. Lower Courts Permit Schools to Employ a Host of Random, Suspicionless Search Practices .................................................... 12
C. Federal and State Programs Have Encouraged the Use of Strict Security Measures............................................................... 13
D. The School Accountability Laws Motivate Schools to Adopt Strict Security Measures................................................................ 15

II. EDUCATIONAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS AGAINST STRICT SECURITY MEASURES ..............................................................16

A. Strict Security Measures Are Not Aligned with Students' Best Interests ........................................................................................ 18
B. Strict Security Measures Applied Disproportionately to Minority Students Are Particularly Harmful................................25

III. EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE REVEALS DISPARITIES IN THE USE OF STRICT SECURITY MEASURES ..............................................................27

A. Data and Sample..........................................................................29
B. Dependent Variables....................................................................30
C. Independent Variables..................................................................32
D. Empirical Methodology................................................................36
E. Results .......................................................................................... 37

IV. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................ 43

A. The Empirical Findings Raise Serious Concerns.........................44
B. Alternative Measures More Effectively Reduce Violence.............48
C. Further Recommendations ........................................................... 55

CONCLUSION....................................................................................................57

[Page 3]

INTRODUCTION

Perhaps never before has our nation been more focused on school security. The horrific massacre of twenty children and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, on December 14, 2012, has provoked intense feelings of sadness, anger, and perplexity.¹ Naturally, parents, educators, policymakers, and communities are searching for immediate solutions to ensure students' safety.² In response to this tragedy, many state legislatures and local school boards are considering whether to allocate additional funding to schools for purchasing security equipment and hiring law enforcement officers.³

[Page 4]

Before policymakers and school officials make these substantial financial commitments, there is much to consider. Just two days prior to the shootings, on December 12, 2012, another event took place that has since been overshadowed by the Newtown tragedy, but is related to the current response. On that day, a U.S. congressional hearing was held to discuss, for the first time, ending the so-called school-to-prison pipeline.⁴ The school-to-prison pipeline refers to the practice of funneling students directly to the juvenile correction system from schools, or suspending or expelling students from schools, thereby creating conditions where those students are more likely to be arrested.⁵ This disturbing trend disproportionately affects minority students, especially African-American boys, depriving many of these students of the benefits of an education, future employment, and participation in our democracy.⁶

While violence and school safety are serious issues that must be addressed, the congressional hearing held just two days before the Newtown shootings highlights another serious problem that our nation faces: the disparate treatment of minority students in public schools. To further illustrate, earlier in 2012, the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights (OCR) released data from a national survey of over 72,000 schools around the country serving approximately eighty-five percent of the nation's students.⁷ The results were troubling, but not surprising. The data revealed that minority students across the country are disciplined more often and more severely than white

[Page 5]

students, have less access to higher-level courses, and more often have teachers that are less experienced and are lower paid.⁸ In response to these findings, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan stated that the "undeniable truth is that the everyday educational experience for many students of color violates the principle of equity at the heart of the American promise."⁹ Indeed, the disparate treatment of minorities in schools, especially of black males, is well documented in the literature.¹⁰

While Congress, the U.S. Department of Education, and scholars have rightfully directed their attention to these disconcerting inequalities, another inequality in public education has received far less attention. This inequality also affects the everyday educational experience of many minority students and low-income students and could become more severe if policymakers decide to direct additional money to schools for security measures. I refer to the disproportionate use of strict security measures.¹¹ Strict security measures include using metal detectors, conducting random sweeps for contraband, hiring law enforcement officers or guards, controlling access to school grounds, and installing security cameras. These measures, particularly when used in combination, can create an intense, prison-like environment that deteriorates the learning climate.¹² As a result, the educational experiences of many minority students and low-income students are often far different—and far worse—than the everyday educational experiences of other students.

[Page 6]

Before embarking on a new phase of security upgrades, policymakers and school officials should first examine the disproportionate use of strict security measures on minorities and low-income students and consider using alternative means to reduce violence that do not degrade the learning environment.

This Article goes beyond the current literature in three ways. First, drawing on a large, national, restricted-access dataset recently released by the Department of Education, this Article empirically demonstrates that student race and student poverty are strong predictors for whether a school chooses to implement a combination of strict security measures, even after accounting for factors such as school crime, neighborhood crime, school disorder, school location, and school size.¹³

Second, this Article describes the current legal landscape in which these disparities have developed. Specifically, as school safety and discipline have become more pressing concerns for schools over the last three decades, courts have substantially weakened students' Fourth Amendment rights.¹⁴ Courts generally permit school officials to employ many types of suspicionless search practices to assist school officials in their efforts to prevent school crime, particularly when those searches are considered to be minimally intrusive.¹⁵ In addition, as part of the recent school accountability movement, federal and state laws require students to be tested each year and impose harsh consequences for failing to meet certain standards.¹⁶ Accordingly, schools have an incentive to push low-performing students out of schools by intensifying their surveillance methods.¹⁷ Further, federal and state programs have encouraged the use of...