以学校为基础的执法策略,减少犯罪,提高安全意识,改善中小学学习成果:系统回顾

IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Benjamin W. Fisher, Anthony Petrosino, Hannah Persson, Sarah Guckenburg, Trevor Fronius, Ivan Benitez, Kevin Earl
{"title":"以学校为基础的执法策略,减少犯罪,提高安全意识,改善中小学学习成果:系统回顾","authors":"Benjamin W. Fisher,&nbsp;Anthony Petrosino,&nbsp;Hannah Persson,&nbsp;Sarah Guckenburg,&nbsp;Trevor Fronius,&nbsp;Ivan Benitez,&nbsp;Kevin Earl","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>School-based law enforcement (SBLE) has become a common intervention. Although SBLE is meant to make schools safer, critics suggest it may not accomplish this purpose, and may have unintended negative consequences such as increasing students’ exclusionary discipline or contact with the criminal justice system. There may also be secondary effects related to perceptions of the school or student learning.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>The purpose of this review is to synthesize the literature evaluating the use of SBLE, including outcomes related to (a) crime and behavior problems; (b) perceptions of safety; and (c) learning.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a systematic literature search to identify studies that examined outcomes associated with SBLE use. Eligible studies used experimental or quasi-experimental designs; included samples of students, teachers/staff, schools, or school districts; reported on a policing strategy focused on crime prevention or school safety that did not involve officers teaching a curriculum; included a measure that reflects crime and behavior problems, perceptions of safety, or learning; and were in a primary or secondary school. Following a multi-stage screening process to identify studies eligible for inclusion, we estimated a series of meta-analytic models with robust variance estimation to calculate weighted mean effect sizes for each of three main categories of outcomes and commonly occurring subsets of these categories. We examined heterogeneity in these estimates across features of the primary studies’ design.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The search and screening process yielded 1002 effect sizes from 32 reports. There were no true experiments, and the quasi-experiments ranged from strictly correlational to permitting stronger causal inferences. SBLE use was associated with greater crime and behavior problems in studies that used schools as the unit of analysis. Within this category, SBLE use was associated with increased exclusionary discipline among studies that used both schools (<i>g</i> = 0.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.02, 0.27]) and students (<i>g</i> = 0.003, 95% CI [0.002, 0.003]) as the unit of analysis. SBLE use was not associated with any measures of crime or violence in schools. SBLE use was associated with greater feelings of safety among studies that used schools as the unit of analysis (<i>g</i> = 0.18, 95% CI [0.13, 0.24]), although this estimate was based on only seven effect sizes from two correlational studies. All the other models, including those examining learning outcomes, yielded null results. None of the moderators tested showed meaningful relationships, indicating the findings were consistent across a variety of study design features.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Authors’ Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>This study's findings provide no evidence that there is a safety-promoting component of SBLE, and support the criticism that SBLE criminalizes students and schools. Although we found no evidence of differences across methodological features, risk of bias in the primary studies limits our confidence in making causal inferences. To the extent that the findings are causal, schools that invest in strategies to improve safety will likely benefit from divesting from SBLE and instead investing in evidence-based strategies for enhancing school safety. Schools that continue to use SBLE should ensure that their model has no harmful effects and is providing safety benefits.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1360","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"School-based law enforcement strategies to reduce crime, increase perceptions of safety, and improve learning outcomes in primary and secondary schools: A systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin W. Fisher,&nbsp;Anthony Petrosino,&nbsp;Hannah Persson,&nbsp;Sarah Guckenburg,&nbsp;Trevor Fronius,&nbsp;Ivan Benitez,&nbsp;Kevin Earl\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cl2.1360\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>School-based law enforcement (SBLE) has become a common intervention. Although SBLE is meant to make schools safer, critics suggest it may not accomplish this purpose, and may have unintended negative consequences such as increasing students’ exclusionary discipline or contact with the criminal justice system. There may also be secondary effects related to perceptions of the school or student learning.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>The purpose of this review is to synthesize the literature evaluating the use of SBLE, including outcomes related to (a) crime and behavior problems; (b) perceptions of safety; and (c) learning.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We conducted a systematic literature search to identify studies that examined outcomes associated with SBLE use. Eligible studies used experimental or quasi-experimental designs; included samples of students, teachers/staff, schools, or school districts; reported on a policing strategy focused on crime prevention or school safety that did not involve officers teaching a curriculum; included a measure that reflects crime and behavior problems, perceptions of safety, or learning; and were in a primary or secondary school. Following a multi-stage screening process to identify studies eligible for inclusion, we estimated a series of meta-analytic models with robust variance estimation to calculate weighted mean effect sizes for each of three main categories of outcomes and commonly occurring subsets of these categories. We examined heterogeneity in these estimates across features of the primary studies’ design.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The search and screening process yielded 1002 effect sizes from 32 reports. There were no true experiments, and the quasi-experiments ranged from strictly correlational to permitting stronger causal inferences. SBLE use was associated with greater crime and behavior problems in studies that used schools as the unit of analysis. Within this category, SBLE use was associated with increased exclusionary discipline among studies that used both schools (<i>g</i> = 0.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.02, 0.27]) and students (<i>g</i> = 0.003, 95% CI [0.002, 0.003]) as the unit of analysis. SBLE use was not associated with any measures of crime or violence in schools. SBLE use was associated with greater feelings of safety among studies that used schools as the unit of analysis (<i>g</i> = 0.18, 95% CI [0.13, 0.24]), although this estimate was based on only seven effect sizes from two correlational studies. All the other models, including those examining learning outcomes, yielded null results. None of the moderators tested showed meaningful relationships, indicating the findings were consistent across a variety of study design features.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Authors’ Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>This study's findings provide no evidence that there is a safety-promoting component of SBLE, and support the criticism that SBLE criminalizes students and schools. Although we found no evidence of differences across methodological features, risk of bias in the primary studies limits our confidence in making causal inferences. To the extent that the findings are causal, schools that invest in strategies to improve safety will likely benefit from divesting from SBLE and instead investing in evidence-based strategies for enhancing school safety. Schools that continue to use SBLE should ensure that their model has no harmful effects and is providing safety benefits.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36698,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Campbell Systematic Reviews\",\"volume\":\"19 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1360\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Campbell Systematic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cl2.1360\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cl2.1360","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

校本执法(SBLE)已成为一种常见的干预措施。尽管SBLE旨在使学校更安全,但批评者认为它可能无法实现这一目的,而且可能会产生意想不到的负面后果,例如增加学生的排斥性纪律或与刑事司法系统的接触。也可能有与学校或学生学习的看法有关的次要影响。本综述的目的是综合评价SBLE使用的文献,包括与(a)犯罪和行为问题相关的结果;(b)安全观念;(c)学习。方法我们进行了系统的文献检索,以确定与SBLE使用相关的研究结果。符合条件的研究采用实验或准实验设计;包括学生、教师/员工、学校或学区的样本;报告了一项以预防犯罪或学校安全为重点的警务战略,该战略不涉及警官教授课程;包括一项反映犯罪和行为问题、对安全的看法或学习的措施;在小学或中学。经过多阶段筛选过程以确定符合纳入条件的研究,我们估计了一系列具有稳健方差估计的元分析模型,以计算三个主要结果类别和这些类别中常见子集的加权平均效应大小。我们检查了这些估计在主要研究设计特征中的异质性。结果32篇报道的搜索筛选过程产生了1002个效应量。没有真正的实验,准实验的范围从严格相关到允许更强的因果推论。在以学校为分析单位的研究中,SBLE的使用与更大的犯罪和行为问题有关。在这一类别中,在使用学校(g = 0.15, 95%可信区间[CI][0.02, 0.27])和学生(g = 0.003, 95% CI[0.002, 0.003])作为分析单位的研究中,SBLE的使用与排斥性纪律的增加有关。SBLE的使用与学校的犯罪或暴力没有任何关系。在以学校为分析单位的研究中,使用SBLE与更大的安全感相关(g = 0.18, 95% CI[0.13, 0.24]),尽管这一估计仅基于来自两项相关研究的七个效应量。所有其他模型,包括那些检查学习结果的模型,都没有得出任何结果。没有一个被测试的调节因子显示出有意义的关系,这表明研究结果在各种研究设计特征中是一致的。本研究的发现没有证据表明SBLE有促进安全的成分,并支持了SBLE将学生和学校定为犯罪的批评。虽然我们没有发现不同方法学特征之间存在差异的证据,但初步研究中的偏倚风险限制了我们进行因果推断的信心。在某种程度上,这些发现是因果关系,投资于改善安全策略的学校可能会从剥离SBLE中受益,而不是投资于以证据为基础的提高学校安全的策略。继续使用SBLE的学校应该确保他们的模式没有有害影响,并提供安全效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

School-based law enforcement strategies to reduce crime, increase perceptions of safety, and improve learning outcomes in primary and secondary schools: A systematic review

School-based law enforcement strategies to reduce crime, increase perceptions of safety, and improve learning outcomes in primary and secondary schools: A systematic review

Background

School-based law enforcement (SBLE) has become a common intervention. Although SBLE is meant to make schools safer, critics suggest it may not accomplish this purpose, and may have unintended negative consequences such as increasing students’ exclusionary discipline or contact with the criminal justice system. There may also be secondary effects related to perceptions of the school or student learning.

Objectives

The purpose of this review is to synthesize the literature evaluating the use of SBLE, including outcomes related to (a) crime and behavior problems; (b) perceptions of safety; and (c) learning.

Methods

We conducted a systematic literature search to identify studies that examined outcomes associated with SBLE use. Eligible studies used experimental or quasi-experimental designs; included samples of students, teachers/staff, schools, or school districts; reported on a policing strategy focused on crime prevention or school safety that did not involve officers teaching a curriculum; included a measure that reflects crime and behavior problems, perceptions of safety, or learning; and were in a primary or secondary school. Following a multi-stage screening process to identify studies eligible for inclusion, we estimated a series of meta-analytic models with robust variance estimation to calculate weighted mean effect sizes for each of three main categories of outcomes and commonly occurring subsets of these categories. We examined heterogeneity in these estimates across features of the primary studies’ design.

Results

The search and screening process yielded 1002 effect sizes from 32 reports. There were no true experiments, and the quasi-experiments ranged from strictly correlational to permitting stronger causal inferences. SBLE use was associated with greater crime and behavior problems in studies that used schools as the unit of analysis. Within this category, SBLE use was associated with increased exclusionary discipline among studies that used both schools (g = 0.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.02, 0.27]) and students (g = 0.003, 95% CI [0.002, 0.003]) as the unit of analysis. SBLE use was not associated with any measures of crime or violence in schools. SBLE use was associated with greater feelings of safety among studies that used schools as the unit of analysis (g = 0.18, 95% CI [0.13, 0.24]), although this estimate was based on only seven effect sizes from two correlational studies. All the other models, including those examining learning outcomes, yielded null results. None of the moderators tested showed meaningful relationships, indicating the findings were consistent across a variety of study design features.

Authors’ Conclusions

This study's findings provide no evidence that there is a safety-promoting component of SBLE, and support the criticism that SBLE criminalizes students and schools. Although we found no evidence of differences across methodological features, risk of bias in the primary studies limits our confidence in making causal inferences. To the extent that the findings are causal, schools that invest in strategies to improve safety will likely benefit from divesting from SBLE and instead investing in evidence-based strategies for enhancing school safety. Schools that continue to use SBLE should ensure that their model has no harmful effects and is providing safety benefits.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Campbell Systematic Reviews Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
21.90%
发文量
80
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信