Journal of Law and Criminal Justice December 2017, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 43-56 ISSN: 2374-2674(Print), 2374-2682(Online) Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved. Published by American Research Institute for Policy Development DOI: 10.15640/jlcj.v5n2a4 URL: https://doi.org/10.15640/jlcj.v5n2a4 School Resource Officer Program Evaluation in the United States Caroletta A. Shuler Ivey1 Abstract Thiscross-sectional quantitative study examines the perception of theeffectiveness of the School Resource Officer Program in South Carolina among 63 school resource officers, their supervisors, and high school principals representing 40 different law enforcement agencies and school districts throughout the state. The purpose of the study examineswhether school resource officers, supervisors of school resource officers, and school principals in South Carolina‘s high schools, perceive school resource officers‘ functions of law-related teaching and law-related counseling to be effective as noted by the National School Resource Officers Association. The data found that there is an overwhelmingly perceive notion of ineffectiveness with lawrelated education functions and duties, and law-related counseling functionsand duties using One-Way ANOVA and Games-Howell post hoc tests.As a result, the null hypothesis is rejected as law-related counseling to be effective by 83 percent. The accepted null hypothesis is due to the results of law-related education functions and duties. The overall participants found law-related education to be 77 percent ineffective. Keywords: school resource officers; Akers‘ social learning theory, high schools; juvenile justice, effectiveness, school law Introduction Schools have established policies that tried to increase discipline and control, often by adopting "get tough" practices. As a result, such policies such as zero tolerance and school uniforms in various schools across the country. Nevertheless, gangs and other discipline problems have caused local law enforcement to try to reduce juvenile delinquency with a stablerelationshipin the schools. The School Resource Officer Program had been established to have a triad model function of law-related educational, law-related counseling, and law enforcement functions to establish a new relationship with juveniles. Previous research had found that there were differences in what law enforcement has deemed as important(Benigni, 2004; Gibson, 2001; Humphrey & Huey, 2001; Lambert & McGinty, 2002; May & Chen, 2009; Murray, 2003; Robinson, 2006; Trump, 2001). It also noted what school administration had deemed essential to establish this relationship (Benigni, 2004; Gibson, 2001; Humphrey & Huey, 2001; Lambert & McGinty, 2002; May & Chen, 2009; Murray, 2003; Robinson, 2006; Trump, 2001). This study examined the perceived effectiveness of school resource officers‘ functions in educational functions, counseling functions, and law enforcement functions among school resource officers, SRO supervisors working within Sheriff and municipal departments, and principals within high schools that have an active School Resource Officer Program. Maranzano (2001) noted that the problem for uniformed law enforcement officers based in a school environment involves the fundamental conflict of interest occurring for school resources officers faced with serving in a dual capacity of educator/teacher and police/law enforcement. Maranzano argued that the legally permissible actions of police officers be never by design intended for police officers serving within the complex context of a school setting. 1Claflin University, 400 Magnolia Street, Orangeburg, SC 29115, USA. civey@claflin.edu, 803-535-5898 44 Journal of Law and Criminal Justice, Vol. 5(2), December 2017 Reacting to behavior by students that are a violation of law in a school setting is a relatively clear matter. However, it becomes increasingly more difficult for the school resource officer to separate the role of educator from a police officer when responding in good faith to students who are in violation of school board regulations that do not rise to the level of violations of law (Robinson, 2006; Maranzano, 2001). Robinson (2006) noted in a study examining the perceptions of middle school administrators and school resources officers found that there was a lack of training and policy conflicts among school administrators that created problems with decisionsmadepromptly. Robinson also noted that school administrators have the authority to fully implement School Resource Officer programs within their schools or merely use school resource officers in law enforcement matters. Consequently, the use of the school resource officers and their effectiveness could have been minimized or compromised. Jackson (2006) argued that it is vital that high school principals and school resource officers have a clear understanding of each other's roles and duties to jointly lead the way to provide a safe and secure school setting(Ivey, 2012). The purpose of this study is to examine whether school resource officers, supervisors of school resource officers, and school principals in South Carolina‘s high schools, perceived school resource officers‘ functions of law-related teaching, law-related counseling, and law enforcement to be effective as noted by the National School Resource Officers Association. Literature Review Limited research on school resource officers‘ perception of the effectiveness of the program within the education system based upon the functions of law-related education, law-related counseling, and law enforcementwas conducted. According to Finn, Shively, McDevitt, Lassiter, and Rich (2005), many School Resource Officer Programs did not define the school resource officers' roles and responsibilities before duties were assumed. As a result, problems arose in the program implementation (Finn et al., 2005). The information gained through the study of school resource officers, supervisors of school resource officers, and high school principals about the perceived effectiveness of a school resource officer‘s responsibilities will give law enforcement supervisors, school administrators and public policy makers‘ invaluable information about the School Resource Officer Program throughout the state of South Carolina. Finn et al. (2005) called for the evaluation of School Resource Officer Programs within school districts throughout the nation. The theory used in the present study was Akers‘ social learning theory (1973). Social learning theory explained the acts of violating social norms and conforming to social norms (Akers, 1998, 2000). As applied to the present study, this theory held that the independent variables of school resource officers; supervisors of school resource officers, high school principals, and effectiveness would influence the dependent variables of law enforcement duties, law-related education, and law-related counseling. Akers‘ social learning theory (differential association, definitions, differential reinforcement, and imitations) was used through these functions to influence the behavior of students. Akers found that there was a stronger likelihood of an adolescent imitating a behavior when the model was respected (Akers, 1973, 1985). 1.Alternative School Safety Policies and Methods 1.1 Zero-Tolerance Policy During the 1980s, the U.S. Customs Agency developed a zero-tolerance policy to use against the growing drug trade (Henault, 2001). This policy of zero tolerancewas introducedwithin America‘s public-school systems under the Clinton administration‘s passing of PL 103-382 called the Gun-Free Schools Act (Martinez, 2009). Martinez (2009) noted that Congress, passing the PL 103-382 – Gun-Free Schools Act, required public schools to implement the zero-tolerance policy students. The law also calledfor enforcing a minimum of a year expulsion to students who bring a firearm to school.Otherwise, these public schools would lose their federal funding that the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 1965 provides (Ashford, 2000; Casella, 2003; Essex, 2001; Skiba, 2000; Stader, 2004). This enforcement was through each state‘s State Department of Education agency. The Gun-Free School Act became the first time a state legislation became involved in the local control of school administrators have over their students (Martinez, 2009).Hirschfield (2008) found that declining teacher discretion and increased harshness in both defining and punishing school deviance can be properly understood only aboutthe third set of practices, namely, the importation of criminal justice into schools. This form of criminalization includes increased use of criminal justice technology, methodology, and personnel for disciplinary and security purposes (Hirschfield, 2008). Zero tolerance‘ exemplifies this trend too, but it is merely the tip of the iceberg. The induction of zero tolerance policies within schools has affected the balance between the educational and the juvenile justice systems (Skiba, 2008). Caroletta A. Shuler Ivey 45 The research has indicated that zero tolerance in schools and communities result in more youth being incarcerated (Burrell & Warboys, 2000). Zero tolerance policies allow for no explanation of the violation committed by the student. Thus, rehabilitation and school-based programs must be the focus to keep these children off the prison track.Criminal justice tools and personnel play an increasingly important role at nearly every stage of the disciplinary process. While police and security officers in schools are hardly novel, school policing is the fastest growing law enforcement field. A 2004 national survey of teachers reported that 67 percent of teachers in majorityblack or Hispanic middle and high schools report armed police stationed in their schools (Hirschfield, 2008). Suburban schools, where 60 percent of teachers work alongside armed police, are not far behind, however (Hirschfield, 2008). Accompanying police and security guards are law enforcement methods like bag searches and video cameras. Among preventive practices, metal detectors and personal searches seem the clearest indications of criminalization since they define students as criminal suspects (Hirschfield, 2008). Not surprisingly, the likelihood of metal detectors is positively related to the prevalence of minority students (DeVoe et al., 2005). School resource officers in schools receive training specific to educational settings. However, as on the street, any violations of the law are subject to arrest, and school officers are not required to obtain permission from anyone to make an arrest (Devine, 1996; Hagan et al., 2002). Ethnographic research suggested that an influx of law enforcement erodes the traditional disciplinary role of teachers and other school authorities (Brotherton, 1996; Devine, 1996). In Miami-Dade, Florida, school arrests increased from 820 in 1999 to 2435 in 2001, and offenses that were once handled mostly internally—simple assaults and ‗miscellaneous offenses‘—comprised a staggering 57 percent (Fuentes, 2003). 1.2 School Uniforms Many individuals, from parents and teachers to policymakers, have suggested that adoption of school uniform policies would alleviate behavior problems, violence, and the perception of gang presence while increasing perceptions of a safe, positive, academically focused, and community-oriented atmosphere (Wade & Stanford, 2003). In the first year of the mandatory uniform policy in Long Beach, for example, school officials reported that fighting decreased by more than 50% (Kennedy, 1995a). Kennedy (1995b) also found that assault and battery decreased by 34%, sex offenses decreased by 74%, androbbery also decreasedby 66%.Cohn and Siegel (1996) also found that school suspensions were also reduced by 32%,along with vandalism by 18%. The results experienced by the Long Beach Unified School District prompted President Clinton‘s attention to the issue of public school uniforms and led to the U.S. Department of Education‘s 1996 Manual on School Uniforms (Stanley, 1996). President Clinton also mentioned school uniforms as a strategy to promote afocus on academics in his 1996 State of the Union Address.Today, many school districts have moved to the mandatory school uniform policy under the concept that this may control the violence within their schools. Brunsma and Rockquemore (1998) study found uniforms to have no direct effect on substance use, behavior, or attendance; but theorized that such policies might indirectly impact school environment and student characteristics by being a visible part of more encompassing programs of education reform. 1.3 School Resource Officer Programs The Library of Congress (2009) noted that the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 had been amended in 1998 to permit grants for public safety and community-oriented policing. The revised act was used to establish school-based partnerships between local law enforcement agencies and local school systems by using law enforcement officers as school resource officers (Library of Congress, 2009). These officers were intended to operate in and around elementary and secondary schools to combat school-related crime and disorder problems, gangs, and drug activities (Library of Congress, (2009). 1.4 Social Learning Theory Social learning theory explained the acts of violating social norms (Akers, 1998, 2000). According to Chappell and Piquero (2004), Akers argued that the balance of differential association, definitions, reinforcement, and imitation (modeling) determine whether one would be prone to engage in conforming or deviant behaviors. Social learning theory had received considerable scholarly attention and empirical support; however, it had not been studied through a school resource officer‘s roles and responsibilities based upon the triad model of law enforcement, lawrelated counseling, and law-related education. 46 Journal of Law and Criminal Justice, Vol. 5(2), December 2017 The underlying assumption in social learning theory was that the same learning process, operating in a context of social structure, interaction, and situation, produced both conforming and deviant behavior (Akers, 1973, 1979, 1998, 2009). The difference lies in the direction of the process in which these mechanisms operate. In both, it was seldom an either-or, all-or-nothing process; what was involved, rather, it was the balance of influences on behavior (Akers, 2009). That balance usually exhibited some stability over time; however, it can become unstable and change with time or circumstances. Akers (2009) contended that conforming and deviant behavior learned through all mechanisms of this process. However, Akers also argued that the theory propose that the principal mechanisms be in that part of the process in which differential reinforcement (effective learning through rewards and punishment) and imitation (observational learning) produced both overt behavior and cognitive definitions that function as discriminative stimuli for the conduct. As a result, the probability of conforming behavior increased, and the likelihood of deviant behavior decreased. Akers (2009) contended that it was peer influence and not peer pressure that encouraged deviant or criminal behavior; that it was not a matter of good kids made to go bad by friends. Adolescents enter the interaction of peer groups with predispositions, prior learning, family socialization, and other influences working together with peer influence. Moreover, the same adolescent can both influence and be influenced by his or her associates. Even though some were more leaders than followers, who were leading whom would vary based upon the situation. Akers (2009) argued that this influence was real, strong, and efficient, but does not fit into the image of how most of thesociety would relate to peer pressure among adolescents. Peer influence did not merely influence deviant behavior. Realistically, for most adolescents, peers were more than likely to endorse conforming definitions and to reinforce conforming behavior (Akers, 2009). Definitions were another essential element of Akers‘ (1973) social learning theory adapted from Sutherland‘s (1939) differential association theory. Akers (1973) noted that definitions were official statements about what was right and what was wrong. According to Schoepfer and Piquero (2006), philosophers in the past had tried to explain what constitutes one‘s moral values and beliefs. Knowing right and wrong, virtues, ethics, or lessons of conduct and behavior were one‘s morals (Schoepfer & Piquero, 2006). This study examinedwhether school resources officers could influence the actual conforming definitions and behaviors of adolescents. Positive role models serve as evidence that honesty, morality, and fairness were necessary attributes (Shoemaker, 2000). School resource officers were supposed to be one of the positive role models that students were to emulate. This modeling behavior can occur outside and inside of the classroom.Vicarious reinforcement and other learning mechanisms have just as much influence on the behavior of adolescents as the influence of peers that were their closest friends. Payne and Cornwell (2007) noted that the effects or influence of peers demonstrated in most criminological literature was rooted firmly in Sutherland‘s (1939) differential association theory and the social learning perspective developed by Burgess and Akers (1966). Most studies, however, focused solely on closest friends have aneffect and as such, tested the influences of those persons with whom an adolescent had direct and regular contact (Payne & Cornwell, 2007). It was this vicarious reinforcement and other learning mechanisms that school resource officers could provide within high schools.Imitation was the social learning variable that was frequently used to explain why adolescents use drugs and smoke cigarettes (Biederman, Faraone, Monuteaux, & Feighner, 2000; Crowe, Torabi, & Nakornkhet, 1994; Doueck, Schinke, Gilchrist, & Snow, 1988; Monroe, 2004). As a result, many researchers had consistently demonstrated that imitation, had an increased likelihood of occurring when the behavior had been reinforced (Akers, Krohn, LanzaKaduce, & Radosevich, 1979; Alexander, 1989, Alexander & Langford, 1992; Krohn, Skinner, Massey, & Akers, 1985; Monroe, 2004). Akers‘ et al. (1979) noted that behavior develops through imitation or modeling. Imitation was the replication of a specific behavior by an individual after viewing people who had performed the same behavior (Payne & Cornwell, 2007). Imitation occurred when first; an individual imitated another because he or she vicariously reinforceanotherbehavior and viewed that behavior as rewarding (Akers, 1973; Payne & Cornwell, 2007). Secondly, imitation occurswhen a person who imitated because of operant conditioning; that is, the reinforcing imitating behavior takes place directly (Akers, 1973; Payne & Cornwell, 2007). Akers found that there was anadmired model had a stronger likelihood of an adolescent imitating a behavior (Akers, 1973, 1985). Consequently, school resource officers in could model good and conforming behavior by becoming a mentor to the adolescents within their assigned high schools. Caroletta A. Shuler Ivey 47 2. Previous School Resource Officer Research Schools have established policies that tried to increase discipline and control, often by adopting "get tough" practices. As a result, such policies such as zero tolerance and school uniforms had been implemented in various schools across the country. Nevertheless, gangs and other discipline problems have caused local law enforcement to try to reduce juvenile delinquency through a stable relationship with the schools. The School Resource Officer Program had been established to have a triad model function of law-related education, law-related counseling, and law enforcement to establish this new relationship with juveniles. Previous research had found that there were differences in what law enforcement deemed as essential and what other school officials considered essential to establish this relationship (Benigni, 2001; Benigni, 2004; Gibson, 2001; Humphrey & Huey, 2001; Ivey, 2012, Lambert & McGinty, 2002; May & Chen, 2009; Murray, 2003; Robinson, 2006; Trump, 2001; VanCleave, 2009). The implementation of social learning theory enhances this relationship because adolescents enter the interaction of peer groups with predispositions, prior learning, family socialization, and other influences working together with peer influence. The fundamental proposition in social learning theory was that the same learning process, operating in a context of social structure, interaction, and situation, produces both conforming and deviant behavior (Akers, 1973, 1979, 1998, 2009). The difference lies in the direction of the process in which these mechanisms operate. In both, it was seldom an either-or, all-or-nothing process; what was involved, instead, is the balance of influences on behavior (Akers, 2009). 3. The South Carolina School Resource Officer Program According to the South Carolina Association of School Resource Officers (SCASRO) (2010), the state of South Carolina established its first School Resource Officer Program in Beaufort County utilizing the Florida model in 1994. The School Resource Officer Program grew throughout the state through the Community Oriented Policing Services in Schools Program (SCASRO, 2010). This program allowed states like South Carolina to apply for grants through the Department of Justice to help law enforcement agents to hire new and additional school resource officers to engage in community policing in and around primary and secondary schools. The grant provided incentives for law enforcement agencies to build acollaborative partnership with school communities and to use communitypolicing efforts to combat school violence (SCASRO, 2010). The SCASRO (2010) provided officers information about what programs are working and what programs are not working within the schools; how to best handle certain situations; and provided a clearinghouse for lesson plans officers can use. The SCASRO (2010) also assisted the South Carolina General Assembly and the South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy in establishing a set of standards for school resource officers. These standardsestablish a state law giving school resource officers‘ statewide jurisdiction while on a school function (SC CodeSection5-7-12), and through providing basic and advanced training for school resource officers through the South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy.According to Ivey (2012), school administration within states, like South Carolina, make agreements with their local law enforcement to serve as school resource officers (Ivey, 2012). Previous research had found that law-related educationwas a priority (Benigni, 2001; Lambert & McGinty, 2002; VanCleave, 2008; Ivey, 2012). Benigni (2001) noted that law-related education should have a higher emphasis than counseling and law enforcement. The specialized training given to school resource officers allows them to be able toassist within the classroom. According to the South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy (2009), officer training in the law can allow them to assist in civic and government classes.The state of South Carolina requires that a school resource officer‘s educationalschedule coordinated with the school administration. School resource officers are required to develop an expertise in presenting various law-related subject matters to high school level students (South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy, 2009). As a counselor, the school resource officer serves as a resourcefor students, their parents, and the school faculty (South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy, 2009). Officers were trained to expect students to approach them with personal, academic, family or law-related problems. Through networking, the school resource officer should be able to refer individuals to the appropriate school administrator or agencies that can assist them. Law-related counseling is considered the most dynamic aspect of the school resource officer‘s assignment.The school resource officer must be knowledgeable of a variety of community and governmental agencies. 48 Journal of Law and Criminal Justice, Vol. 5(2), December 2017 These officers become resources to their police agencies through providing intelligence on gangs, juvenile crimes, burglaries, drugs, auto theft, vandalism, and alike. Commonly, the school resource officer becomes a clearinghouse of information about topics such as crime prevention, alcohol, other drug abuse, pregnancy prevention, and other public health issues, as well as other public assistance agencies such as rape crisis and domestic abuse shelters. These officers also should act as a positive liaison between students, the school, and family court. Methods 4. Current Study The study,conducted during the academic school year of 2009-2010, evaluated the triad model of law-related counseling, law-related education, and law enforcement functions of a school resource officer‘s duties based on previous literature, the South Carolina School Resource Officer Association, and the South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy.This paper focuses on law-related counseling and law-related education duties and functions of a school resource officers‘ training for a high school. The study answered the following question: To what extent do school resource officers‘ law-related counseling duties and law-related education duties effectiveness are perceived by school resource officers, supervisors of school resource officers, and high school principals? As a result, the null hypothesisis that school resource officers‘ law-related counseling and law-related education duties are perceived as effective by school resource officers, supervisors of school resource officers, and high school principals. 4.1 Data Analysis The School Resource Officer Program Evaluation Survey wasaresearcher-developedsurvey based on the knowledge gained from previous empirical research studies conducted with school resource officers. Based upon the pilot study conducted, six items under law-related counseling were measured using Cronbach‘s Alpha. The Cronbach‘s Alpha-based upon standardized items was .809. The alpha coefficient for the six items was .815, suggesting that the items had a relatively high internal consistency. Law-related educational had 12 items that were measured using Cronbach‘s Alpha. The Cronbach‘s Alpha-based upon the standardized items was .808. The alpha coefficient for the 12 items was .777, suggesting that the items had a relatively high internal consistency. Law enforcement had 22 items that were measured using Cronbach‘s Alpha. The Cronbach‘s Alpha-based upon the standardized items was .844. The alpha coefficient for the 22 items was .795, suggesting that the items had a relatively high internal consistency. A principal component factor analysis was conducted on all the variables that measured on a Likert scale based upon effectiveness. Six factors were extracted. The initial eigenvalues showed that the first factor explained 24.013% of the variance, the second factor explained 20.580% of the variance, the third factor explained 16.820% of the variance, the fourth factor explained 14.518% of the variance, the fifth factor explained 12.635% of the variance, and the sixth factor explained 8.773% of the variance. The principal component factor analysis found that all communalities extraction was a .906 and above, 100 percent. Effectiveness was measured using a five-item scale, with a 4 representing ―highly effective,‖ a 3 representing ―effective,‖ a 2 representing ―ineffective,‖ a 1 representing ―highly ineffective, and a 0 representing ―not applicable.‖ The data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests to determine if there was a significant difference between the perception of school resource officers, supervisors of school resource officers, and high school principals regarding the three primary functions of law-related counseling, law-related educational, and law enforcement. One-way ANOVA analysis had been chosen due to the interval/ratio data of the five-item scale. Due to the unequal means, Games-Howell post hoc tests are conducted with all survey questions were F analysis was statistically significant. 4.2 Sample The simple random sampling method was used to conduct the study. Each possible high school and law enforcement agency participating in the School Resource Officer Program had been numbered in the sampling frame. A random number generator had been used to select 105 numbers ofschool resource officers; supervisors of school resource officers, and high school principals each; whose numbers correspond. As a result, every school resource officer assigned to a South Carolina high school and every high school principal, who met the set criteria of not being assigned to an alternative school, a charter school, or a correctional facility, had an equal chance of being selected. Caroletta A. Shuler Ivey 49 The population size was N=105 possible participants for the study. The present study‘s data included n=63 participants throughout the state of South Carolina. Participants represented all four regions of South Carolina. The Upstate region represented 30.2% of the sample; the Pee Dee region represented 14.3% of the sample; the Midlands region represented 41.3% of the sample, and the Low Country region represented 14.3% of the sample.The sample consisted of three group populations; 32 school resource officers; 15 the supervisors of the school resource officers; and 16 high school principals with an overall net response rate of 60%. The response rate was consistent with the Lambert study (60%) and the May and Chen study (56.4%) (Lambert, 2000; May & Chen, 2007). Findings 5. Law-Related Counseling An analysis of the law-related counseling section of the School Resource Officer Program Evaluation Survey used a One-Way ANOVA. The first function, school resource officers have counseled students, faculty, and staff on law-related issues data, as in Table 1, with F = 10.552, p = .000, are found to be effective (M= 3.53).The GamesHowell post hoc comparison (Table 2) of the parties, indicate that there is a statistically significant difference between the high school principals and the school resource officers.and their supervisors, mentors to students within the school, data indicate this to be effective (3.39),with F = 3.654, p = .032, and the Games-Howell post hoc indicate that there is also a statistically significant difference, again between the high school principals and the law enforcement officers. Law-related counseling duty, providing guidance on ethical issues in a school setting, data indicatesthat the three groups overall perceive school resource officers to be effective (M= 3.28). With F = 6.928, p = .002, the data also demonstrate a statistically significant difference between the three groups. The Games-Howell post hoc comparison indicates that there is a statistically significant difference between high school principals and school resource officers. There is also a statistically significant difference between high school principals and supervisors of school resource officers. High school principals found this duty to be ineffective, overall. The law-related counseling functions of school resource officers working with community agencies and make referrals to agencies when necessary, data indicate to be effective (3.46) with F = 5.027, p = .010. The Games-Howell post hoc comparison indicated statistically significant difference between high school principals and school resource officers. Some high school principals did find this duty to be ineffective, but not enough did to influence the overall average. There is also a statistically significant difference between high school principals and supervisors of school resource officers. Specific functions relating to delinquency are essential to law-related counseling. The function of school resource officers intervening in student arguments and speaking with all persons involved to avoid altercations is analyzed. Participants, with anF=.341, p = .713 data demonstrates no statistically significant difference between the three groups. The function of school resource officers preventing juvenile delinquency through close contact with students and school personneldata to be effective (M=3.16). WithF= 4.241, p = .019 and a Games-Howell post hoc comparison that indicates there is a statistically significant difference between school resource officers and high school principals. The data notes that high school principals‘ perception of school resource officers preventing juvenile delinquency through close contact with students, and staff personnel are ineffective. Interesting enough, however, supervisors of school resource officers also notes, like school resource officers, to be effective. Table 1. ANOVA for Statistically Significant Law-Related Counseling Functions Dependent Variable Counseled Mentors Guidance Community Agencies Prevent Juvenile Delinquency SD .56298 .50243 .60718 .61763 50243 *. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. M 3.53 3.39 3.28 3.46 3.68 F 10.552 3.654 6.928 5.027 4.241 Sig. .000 .032 .002 .010 .019 50 Journal of Law and Criminal Justice, Vol. 5(2), December 2017 Table 2. Games-Howell Post Hoc of Statistically Significant Law-Related Counseling Functions Dependent Variable (I) Occupation Counseled SRO (J) Occupation SRO Supervisor School Principal SRO Supervisor SRO School Principal School Principal SRO SRO Supervisor Mentors SRO SRO Supervisor School Principal SRO Supervisor SRO School Principal School Principal SRO SRO Supervisor Guidance SRO SRO Supervisor School Principal SRO Supervisor SRO School Principal School Principal SRO SRO Supervisor Community Agencies SRO SRO Supervisor School Principal SRO Supervisor SRO School Principal School Principal SRO SRO Supervisor Prevent Juvenile Delinquency SRO SRO Supervisor School Principal SRO Supervisor SRO School Principal School Principal SRO SRO Supervisor *. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. Mean Difference (I-J) .15000 .68750* -.15000 .53750* -.68750* -.53750* -.16250 .31250* .16250 .47500* -.31250* -.47500* -.25625 .46875* .25625 .72500* -.46875* -.72500* -.00625 .53125* .00625 .53750* -.53125* -.53750* .07292 .93958* -.07292 .86667* -.93958* -.86667* Std. Error .18087 .13523 .18087 .19725 .13523 .19725 .18602 .12341 .18602 .18428 .12341 .18428 .16868 .16412 .16868 .18102 .16412 .18102 .19616 .15509 .19616 .19725 .15509 .19725 .29411 .34202 .29411 .34549 .34202 .34549 Sig. .689 .000 .689 .030 .000 .030 .662 .040 .662 .044 .040 .044 .295 .019 .295 .001 .019 .001 .999 .004 .999 .030 .004 .030 .967 .026 .967 .047 .026 .047 The current study notes that five out of the six law-related counseling duties and functions are statistically significant. The study also notes that all functions score an overall effective based on the data. Only the law-related counseling function of, school resource officers providing guidance on ethical issues in a school setting, scored an ineffective average among high school principals. As a result, the null hypothesis is rejected as law-related counseling to be effective by 83 percent. 6. Law-Related Education The law-related education section of the School Resource Officer Program Evaluation Survey analyzes twelve functions. School resource officers train in conveying law-related education functions or duties in high schools. In the first function, participants note that the function allows SROs to explain the role of law enforcement within society to faculty, staff, and students with F = 1.670, p = .197 to be effective (M= 3.44). Participants also note that SROs educate students on their rights and responsibilities as lawful citizens within the state and nation, with F = 1.471, p = .238 also to be effective (M= 3.22). However, the study found that SROs collaborating with faculty on lesson plans to teach the criminal justice role in classes such as American Government and Civics,withF = 6.043, p = .004, data demonstrate thestatistically significant difference between the three groups and finds to be ineffective (M= 2.48). The Games-Howell post hoc comparison notes a statistically significant difference between supervisors of school resource officers and school resource officers themselves. There is also a statistically significant difference between supervisors of school resource officers and high school principals. Caroletta A. Shuler Ivey 51 The supervisors of school resource officers have the perception that school resource officers collaborate with faculty on lesson plans; however, school resource officers (M=2.27, 95% CI [1.97, 2.57]) p = .002 and high school principals (M=2.31, 95% CI [1.88, 2.73]) p = .015 perceptions of this duty is not very effective. Some school resource officers and high school principals noted on their surveys that SROs are not given the opportunity to teach within the classroom within their schools. Education within schools also deals with students who are on an individual education plan (IEP) within the state. An IEP is imperative in dealing with students with special needs. The law-related education function of school resource officers being able to understand and teach with an Individual Education Plan (IEP), data perceives to be ineffective (M= 2.35) with F =4.212, p=.020. The Games-Howell post hoc comparison notes that there is a statistically significant difference between the participant groups; but all found this function to be ineffective with supervisors of school resource officers (M=2.69, 95% CI [2.23, 3.14]); high school principals (M=2.00, 95% CI [2.00, 2.00]) p = .016; and school resource officers (M=2.39, 95% CI [2.10, 2.67]) p = .023. Teaching state law to students as it relates to adolescents within the state dataindicates that the three groups perceive school resource officers to be ineffective (M= 2.95) in this duty. With F = 7.669, p=.001, the data demonstrate a statistically significant difference between the three groups. In conducting a Games-Howell post hoc comparison on the function a statistically significant difference found that the supervisors of school resource officers (M=3.26, 95% CI [2.87, 3.65]) perceive this to be effective; however high school principals (M=2.10, 95% CI [2.10, 2.77]) p=.005 and school resource officers (M=2.78, 95% CI [2.39, 3.16]) p=.007 do not. Another function of law-related education is school resource officers providing classroom instruction that involves direct intervention with gang members is found to be ineffective (M= 2.49) with F = 3.505, p=.037. The Games-Howell post hoc analysis reveals that there is not a significant difference between high school principals (M=2.87, 95% CI [2.49, 3.25]), supervisors of school resource officers (M=2.92, 95% CI [2.35, 3.50]), and school resource officers (M=2.33, 95% CI [2.03, 2.63]) on this function. School resource officers‘ response is extremely lower, noting that they have no class time with gang members except in handling a discipline situation. The three group participants perceive the school resource officers areteaching alcohol and drug education workshops on the high school level to be (M= 2.77) ineffective. Officers can employ various social influence and skill strategies and techniques through such instructions as youth role-playing, socio-drama, and model alcohol-free and drug-free behavior with this function. With F = 4.989, p=.010, the data demonstrates that there is a statistically significant difference between the three groups. The Games-Howell post hoc analysis reveals that is a significant difference between high school principals (M=2.31, 95% CI [1.93, 2.68]), school resource officers (M=2.89, 95% CI [2.64, 3.13]) p=028 and supervisors of school resource officers (M=3.07, 95% CI [2.55, 3.59]) p=.043. Supervisors of school resource officers are the only group that perceives this function to be effective. The function, school resource officers teach about the influence that peer, media, and family may have on drug usage, abstaining decisions, and how to deal with and resist these influences, dataindicates that the three groups perceive school resource officers to be ineffective (M= 2.88). With F = 3.838, p=.027, the data demonstrates that there is a statistically significant difference between the three groups. The Games-Howell post hoc comparison analysis of the three groups indicates that there is a marginally statistically significant difference between the school resource officers (M=3.10, 95% CI [2.89, 3.30]) and high school principals (M=2.50, 95% CI [2.02, 2.97]) p=.058. The Games-Howell analysis also reveals no statistically significant difference between supervisors of school resource officers (M=2.86, 95% CI [2.45, 3.27]) and school resource officers or high school principals. Another law-related education function, the ability for school resource officers to create educational crime prevention programs to reduce the opportunity for crime against persons and property in the school, data indicates that the participants perceive this function to be ineffective (M= 2.80). With F (2, 58) = 2.276, p=.112, however, the data demonstrates that there is no statistically significant difference between the three groups. The law-related education function, school resource officers, educate students in conflict resolution strategies; data indicates that the three groups perceived school resource officers to be effective (M= 3.10). With F = .321, p=.727, the data notes that there is no statistically significant difference between the participants. The function of school resource officers is teaching students to repair the harm caused by crime data indicates that the three groups perceive school resource officers to be ineffective(M= 2.50). With F = 1.209, p = .306. 52 Journal of Law and Criminal Justice, Vol. 5(2), December 2017 The data demonstrate that there is no statistically significant difference between the three groups. Finally, the law-related education function, school resource officers teach anti-bullying classes or seminars, data, SD=1.07763) indicates that the three groups perceive school resource officers to be ineffective (M= 2.62). With F = 3.183, p = .049, the data found that there is a statistically significant difference between school resource officers, supervisors of school resource officers, and high school principals.The Games-Howell post hoc comparison analysis, however, reveals that there is no true statistically differences. Table 3. ANOVA for Statistically Significant Law-Related Education Functions Dependent Variable Collaborate with Faculty Individual Education Plan Teaching State Law about Adolescents Direct Gang Members Intervention Alcohol and Drug Education Workshop Teach About in Influence of Peer, Media, and Family on Drug Usage Teaching Anti-Bullying Classes or Seminars SD M F Sig. .64202 .67227 .69927 1.01398 .75634 .73254 1.07763 3.440 2.35 3.059 2.419 2.498 2.882 2.62 6.043 4.212 7.669 3.505 4.989 3.838 3.183 .004 .020 .001 .037 .010 .027 .049 *. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. Table 4A. Games-Howell Post Hoc of Statistically Significant Law-Related Education Functions Dependent Variable (I) Occupation (J) Occupation Collaborate with Faculty SRO SRO Supervisor School Principal SRO School Principal SRO SRO Supervisor SRO Supervisor School Principal SRO School Principal SRO SRO Supervisor SRO Supervisor School Principal SRO School Principal SRO SRO Supervisor SRO Supervisor School Principal SRO School Principal SRO SRO Supervisor SRO Supervisor School Principal IEP SRO SRO Supervisor School Principal Teach SC Law SRO SRO Supervisor School Principal Class Instruction SRO SRO Supervisor School Principal *. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. Mean Difference (I-J) -.79080* -.03664 .79080* .75417* .03664 -.75417* -.29945 .39286* .29945 .69231* -.39286* -.69231* -.19770 .63147* .19770 .82917* -.63147* -.82917* -.59524 -.54167 .59524 .05357 .54167 -.05357 Std. Error Sig. .21308 .24746 .21308 .25063 .24746 .25063 .25062 .13934 .25062 .20831 .13934 .20831 .21251 .19205 .21251 .24032 .19205 .24032 .30413 .23184 .30413 .32145 .23184 .32145 .002 .988 .002 .015 .988 .015 .468 .023 .468 .016 .023 .016 .627 .007 .627 .005 .007 .005 .148 .064 .148 .985 .064 .985 Caroletta A. Shuler Ivey 53 Table 4B. Games-Howell Post Hoc of Statistically Significant Law-Related Education Functions Dependent Variable (I) Occupation (J) Occupation Alcohol and drug education SRO SRO Supervisor School Principal SRO School Principal SRO SRO Supervisor SRO Supervisor School Principal SRO School Principal SRO SRO Supervisor SRO Supervisor School Principal SRO School Principal SRO SRO Supervisor SRO Supervisor School Principal Teach influence SRO SRO Supervisor School Principal Bullying SRO SRO Supervisor School Principal Mean Difference (I-J) -.18407 .58036* .18407 .76442* -.58036* -.76442* .23333 .60000 -.23333 .36667 -.60000 -.36667 -.53022 -.40714 .53022 .12308 .40714 -.12308 Std. Error Sig. .26707 .21240 .26707 .29697 .21240 .29697 .21639 .24495 .21639 .29466 .24495 .29466 .26707 .21119 .26707 .29610 .21119 .29610 .773 .028 .773 .043 .028 .043 .537 .058 .537 .438 .058 .438 .144 .150 .144 .910 .150 .910 *. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. The null hypothesis isaccepted due to the results of law-related education functions and duties. The overall participants found law-related education to be 77 percent ineffective. There are three functions (25%) perceive to be effective; however, there are nine functions (75%) to be ineffective data. There are four functions to have a statistically significant difference, while eight questions did not. Three functions also reveal a statistically significant one-way ANOVA, but a non-statistically significant Games-Howell analysis. Limitations Participants‘ responses to the survey instrument represent the perspectives or opinions of school resource officers, their supervisors, and high school principals‘ the School Resource Officer Programwithin their local area, who agreed to participate based on permission of their Sheriff, Chief of Police, and Superintendent of their school district. Generalization is made only to a larger population of School Resource Office Programsin high schools whose school districts define the duties and functions of the school resource officers within their schools, even though the law enforcement agency employs the officer. However, other states allow either publicpolicy or the law enforcement agency to structure their School Resource Officer Programs. Discussion The goals of the National School Resource Officer Program, based upon the triad model, are to prevent juvenile delinquency and to improve community relations. According to Hess (2010), in considering the prevention of juvenile delinquency, officers are expected to perform a variety of activities through law-related counseling functions, law-related educationalfunctions, and law enforcement functions. School resource officers are also required to improve community relations through the School Resource Officer Program. Hess noted that school resource officers across the nation must realize that public appearance is a crucial technique in accomplishing this goal. According to Hess, behavioral problems are more noticeable in schools before they become a severe delinquent activity.Individual contact is the most efficient type of contact with many young individuals. According to Akers (2001), differential association with other attitudes or meanings that one associates oneself with will help to shape the individual‘s definitions as their attitudes or meanings to a given behavior. According to Warr (2002), even though primary groups of differential association are one‘s friends and family, the concept of differential association is both direct and indirect. 54 Journal of Law and Criminal Justice, Vol. 5(2), December 2017 Secondary and reference groups that can occur earlier (priority), last longer and occupy more of one‘s time (duration), take place most often (frequency), and involve others with whom one has the more critical or closer relationship (intensity) will have a more significant effect on behavior (Pratt et al., 2010).According to Pratt et al. (2010), a social learning theory predictor of differential association is peers‘ behaviors, parents‘ behaviors, others‘ behaviors, peers‘ attitudes, parents‘ attitudes, and others‘ attitudes. Pratt et al. found that others‘ attitudes are significantly stronger when no controls for variables specified by competing for criminological theories are included in the model. Cross-sectional studies found that parents‘ attitudes are weaker than peer behavior when it comes to such deviant behavior as drug and alcohol abuse studies. However, peer behavior considers havingaweaker influence on violent crime, property crime, and theft, where parents‘ behavior has a stronger influence. Peer behavior has amore robust influence on juveniles than peer behavior on conforming students. As a result, the School Resource Officer Program must implement its law-related education function to change the definitions of how serious offenses are viewed. Definitions may be general (broadly approving or disapproving a crime) or specific toan act or a situation (Akers, 2001). Pratt et al. (2010) noted that ―definitions may also be negative (oppositional to crime), positive (defining a criminal behavior as desirable), or neutralizing (defining crime as permissible)‖ (p. 768). The present study has found that the current makeup of the School Resource Officer Program stresses more of the law enforcement functions within high schools. An overrepresentation of law enforcement functions does not lend itself to change one‘s definitions of crime. When a student‘s only contact with a school resource officer is within his or her law enforcement capacity, there is very little chance for their definition of how crime is perceived. School resource officers must address students outside of them committing a seriousoffense within the school system. The social learning theory predictors of definitions are antisocial behavior. Through the prevention of juvenile delinquency, school resource officers should maintain contacts with parents or guardians of students who exhibit antisocial behaviors. School resource officers should recommend mental health services for these students, so that diet and medication control their behavior. Differential reinforcement is another element of social learning theory; which is based on acts being reinforced through rewards or the avoidance of discomfort that is likely to be repeated, whereas, punishment is less likely to be repeated. The School Resource Officer Program would allow trained officers within the law, to conduct workshops and seminarson diverse topics such as alcohol and drugs and the physical changes of the body with the biology teacher. School resource officers also can explain how common law affects students as citizens and how status offenses affect them as adolescents in civil and government classes. According to Pratt et al., (2010), studies have found that social learning theory predictors for differential reinforcement are peer reactions, parental reactions, others‘ reactions, and rewards minus the costs. The cost could be the reputation of the student from not being popular with their peers‘ due to not committing serious offenses such as harassment or intimidation through bullying. 7. J.D.B. V. North Carolina The J.D.B. v. North Carolina case deals with Miranda in schools. The United States Supreme Court ruled in 2011 that age must be taken into consideration when the police deliver the Miranda warning to students. In other words, school resource officersdonot have to give Miranda warnings to school children and therefore, must have parents present. It is important also to note that school officials do not have to issue Miranda warnings to students and the legal conflicts can arise. Is the school resource officer a school official or a member of law enforcement since their duties are agreed upon by school administration. 8. Policy Implications The goal of school resource officers within schools is to educate and become mentors to students. The aspect of law-related education and law-related counseling goals are to make these factors happen. Instead, however, the structure or plans set by school administrators have been primary security and law enforcement while stationed in high schools. New questions have emerged from this study. If officers are taken off the streets and assigned to a school(s) to provide only law enforcement duties at school(s); is it not a waste of taxpayers money to have that happen, especially if crime rises within a community? Then what is the real purpose of having law enforcement within our high schools? Caroletta A. Shuler Ivey 55 There is an opportunity to reconsider the role and effectiveness of school resource officers, as well as police, in schools.Akers (2001) contends that crime, especially when first initiated, can be influenced through imitation. The School Resource Officer Program provides students with specially trained officers to teach and mock conforming behavior for students. Through this present study, law enforcement agencies, high schools, training academies, and lawmakers can have a better comprehension of the duties of school resource officers and the effectiveness of the School Resource Officer Program. The present study, have demonstrated that the overall School Resource Officer Program is perceived to be effective. However, one of the critical components of this program, law-related educationhave been found to be ineffective due to the lack of implementation within the schools and the serious offenses that do occur that can be resolveisnoted as having sometimes occurred within the findings of the study. References Akers, R. L. (1973). Deviant behavior: A social learning approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Akers, R. L. (1985). Social learning theory and adolescent cigarette smoking. Social Problems, 32, 455-73. Akers, R. L. (1998). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press. Akers, R. L. (2000). Criminological theories: Introduction, evaluation, and application. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury. Akers, R. L. (2009). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press. Akers, R. L., Krohn, M., Lanza-Kaduce, L., & Radosevich, M. (1979). Social learning and deviant behavior: A specific test of a general theory. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 636-655. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database. Alexander, J., & Langford, L. (1992). Throwing down: A social learning test of students fighting. Social Work in Education, 14(2), 114-124. Retrieved from SocINDEX with Full-Text database. Alexander, R. Jr. (1989). Students fighting as a test of social learning theory. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Minnesota). Dissertation Abstracts International, 50, 4100. Benigni, M. D. (2001). The role of the school resource officer. Dissertation Abstracts International, 62(03), 850. (UMI No. 3007150). Benigni, M. (2004, May). The need for school resource officers. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 73(5), 22-24. Biederman, J., Faraone, S. V., Monuteaux, M. C., &Feighner,J. A. (2000). Patterns of alcohol and drug use in adolescents can be predicted by parental substance use disorders. Pediatrics, 106(4), 792–797. Burgess, R. & Akers, R. L. (1966). A differential association-reinforcement theory of criminal behavior. Social Problems, 14, 363-383. Chappell, A. T., & Piquero, A. R. (2004). Applying social learning theory to police misconduct.Deviant Behavior, 25 (2): 89-108. Crowe, J. W., Torabi, M. R., & Nakornkhet, N. (1994). Cross-cultural study samples of adolescents‘attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors related to smoking. Psychological Reports, 75, 1155–1161. Doueck, H. J., Schinke, S. P., Gilchrist, L. W., & Snow, W. H. (1988). School-based tobacco use prevention. Journal of Adolescent Health Care, 9(3), 1-4. Finn, P., Shively, M., McDevitt, J., Lassiter, W., Rich, T. (2005). Comparison of program activities and lessons learned among 19 school resource officer (SRO) programs. National Criminal Justice Reference Service. Retrieved on October 10, 2009, from http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/209272.pdf Gibson, P. J. (2001). A study of the perceptions of the roles and responsibilities of the school resource officer in secondary schools. Dissertation Abstracts International, 6(09), 2935. (UMI No. 3026200) Ivey, C.A.S. (2012). ―Teaching, counseling, and law enforcement functions in South Carolina high schools: A study on the perception of time spent among School Resource Officers.‖ International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences, 7(2), 550-561. Hess, K. M. (2010). Juvenile justice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. 56 Journal of Law and Criminal Justice, Vol. 5(2), December 2017 Humphrey, J. & Huey, M. (2001). School resource officer effectiveness in New Hampshire: A longitudinal analysis. Justice Works/University of New Hampshire. Krohn, M. D., Skinner, W. F., Massey, J. L., & Akers, R. L. (1985). Social learning theory and adolescent cigarette smoking: A longitudinal study. Social Problems, 32, 455-471. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database. Lambert, R. D. (2000). Perceived importance of certain characteristics, knowledge, skills, and job tasks for the school resource officer position: A survey of principals, law enforcement officials, and school resource officers. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(11), 4331. (UMI No. 9993978) Lambert, R. D., & McGinty, D. (2002). Law enforcement officers in schools: Setting priorities. Journal of Educational Administration, 40, 257-274. Maranzano, C. (2001). The legal implications of school resource officers in public schools. NASSP Bulletin, 85(621), 76-80. May, D. C., & Chen, Y. (2009). School resource officers in Kentucky who are they and what do they do? Kentucky Center for School Safety SRO Annual Report 2009.Retrieved on December 18, 2009, from http://www.kycss.org/schoolresource.htm Monroe, J. (2004). Getting a puff: A social learning test of adolescents smoking. Journal of Child & Adolescent Substance Abuse, 13(3), 71-83. Murray, B. J. (2003). Perceptions of principals, school resource officers, and school resource officer supervisors of the school resource officer program in comprehensive high schools in Riverside County, California. Dissertation Abstracts International, 64(05), 1482. (UMI No. 3090259) Payne, D., & Cornwell, B. (2007). Reconsidering peer influences on delinquency: Do less proximate contacts matter? Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 23(2), 127-149. Pratt, T. C., Cullen, F.T., Sellers, C.S., Winfree, Jr., L.T., Madensen, T.D., Daigie, L. E., Fearn, N. E., & Gau, J.M. (2010). The empirical status of social learning theory: A meta-analysis. Justice Quarterly, 27(6), 765-802. Robinson, T. R. (2006). Understanding the role of the school resource officer (SRO): Perceptions from middle school administrators and SROs.University of Tennessee, DAI-A 68/01. Schoepfer, A., & Piquero, A. (2006). Self-control, moral beliefs, and criminal activity. Deviant Behavior, 27(1), 51-71. Shoemaker, D. J. (2000). Theories of delinquency (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy (2009). Basic school resource officer training manual. Columbia, SC: South Carolina Department of Public Safety. South Carolina Association of School Resource Officer, (2010). History of the school resource officer and the South Carolina Association of School Resource Officers. Retrieved on June 15, 2009, from http://www.scasro.org/HISTORY.htm Sutherland, E.H. (1939). Principles of criminology (3rd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott. Trump, K. S., & Lavarello, C., (2001, March). Buyer beware: What to look for when you hire a school security consultant. American School Board Journal, 30-34. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database. VanCleave, J. (2008). School resource officers: What high school teachers consider to be the most important tasks. Dissertation Abstracts International, 69(04), (UMI No. 3296716). Verrill, S. W. (2008). Social structure-social learning and delinquency: Mediation or moderation? New York, NY: LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. Warr, M. (2002). Companions in crime: The social aspects of criminal conduct. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.