critical thinking in law enforcement

August 22, 2024 | Unconventional Wisdom: Research Shakes Up Assumptions About Sex Trafficking Clues in Online Escort Ads
August 21, 2024 | Tools for Building Trust: Designing Law Enforcement–Community Dialogue and Reacting to the Use of Deadly Force and Other Critical Law Enforcement Actions
August 20, 2024 | Safer Schools Clearinghouse
August 17, 2024 | Preparedness for Overdose Response Among Law Enforcement Agencies
August 12, 2024 | Unleashing Pandora’s Box: The Threat of AI-driven Cybercrime
August 12, 2024 | Imaging System Brings New Perspective in Paramount+’s Summer Hit Series, “CHOPPER COPS”
August 7, 2024 | How to Reduce Your Wobble Zone
August 2, 2024 | Improving Analysis of “Trace DNA” Evidence
August 1, 2024 | Ballistic Armor Update: 2024
July 29, 2024 | NTOA Releases new Public Order and Tactical Response Operations Standards

Critical Thinking: A Core Task of Public Safety Employees

Posted By: publisher October 18, 2022

John G. Peters, Jr., Ph.D.

Critical thinking skills enable law enforcement personnel to analyze information and process it wisely in order to help determine the value of that information and make a decision.

There are too many documented instances of a suspect telling an officer, “I can’t breathe,” only to hear the officer say, “If you’re talking, you’re breathing.” Another example is a handcuffed suspect who tells an officer, “These handcuffs are too tight,” only to be told by the officer, “They weren’t made for comfort,” or “As you wear them, they will soften.” Because these are not isolated examples, you, too, can probably think of similar phrases you have heard from colleagues. One possible explanation for these types of responses is a lack of training in critical thinking .

College Web sites promise critical thinking will be taught to learners, yet few undergraduate programs include it. Professors claim to teach it, but few evaluate their students on it. Public safety academy and in-service instructors support its teaching, but few can give examples of where to find it in curricula or how it can be evaluated. Yet, in frustration, many administrators and/or colleagues will ask, “What was the officer thinking? Why didn’t (s)he do something? These officers can’t think today. Why won’t officers make better decisions?”

Public safety personnel are expected by the public, by their administrators and by others to engage in critical thinking when confronted with a situation. This presumption, which some people argue is indispensable for public safety personnel, reinforces it as a core task within the job description of public safety personnel. The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) held in City of Canton, Ohio v. Harris , 489 U.S. 378 (1989) that municipalities have an affirmative duty to train employees in core tasks . Municipalities and/or policymakers which fail to conduct such training may be found to be “deliberately indifferent” when it can be shown that there was an obvious need for more or different training, and the failure to train was likely to result in the violation of a person’s constitutional rights. In short, it is vital to include education and training about critical thinking in recruit and in-service training programs.

Critical Thinking Defined

There are many critical thinking definitions, all focusing on the process of evaluating spoken or written statements. Critical thinking involves active listening, reading, evaluation of behavioral cues and signs, looking for hidden agendas, and thinking through the consequences of a person’s or a document’s claim(s). In other words, officers must carefully and deliberately determine if a person’s claim(s) should be accepted, rejected or if suspension of judgment is in order before deciding a person’s claim is true or false. Officers must also identify and consider the potential outcomes and consequences of ignoring such claims. For this article, the focus is limited to an individual’s claim.

Claims Which Require Critical Thinking

Almost every day, public safety personnel engage people who may make claims about what the officer or others are doing, have done and so forth. Examples include saying, “I can’t breathe,” “I didn’t take no drugs,” “I didn’t do anything,” “I didn’t hit him,” and “Stop using excessive force.” Of course, the last claim may come in the form of a written “Citizen Complaint” which requires interviewing the officer(s) involved and performing an investigation. Internal Investigators and administrators must then use their critical thinking skills to judge if the claims are true, but that discussion is for another article.

Critical Thinking Steps

Regardless of the critical thinking definition adopted and used, there are three basic steps involved in critical thinking:

1. Evaluating the information available and/or received from the individual or others and then assessing it (e.g., “I’m having difficulty breathing”). The officer must analyze and weigh the arguments and/or evidence presented. The officer must try to separate fact from opinion.

2. Determining if the claim appears to be true (err on the side of the claim) and

3. Forming a conclusion which, based on the officer’s reasoning, most likely, the person’s claim is true or false or, if there is not enough information, suspending judgment until more information has been obtained. Officers must also be aware of any conscious and/or unconscious bias creeping into their decision-making process.

Obviously, education, training, experience, and organizational culture may impact an officer’s ability to think critically about a claim made by individuals or others. Ask yourself, “Have I been trained to think critically?” Even more legally focused, has your employer trained you to use and apply the three critical thinking steps and also evaluate you on your conclusion when given situational-based scenarios? If “no,” your employer may have failed to train you and other employees on how to objectively evaluate a claim made by an individual and then reach a conclusion about it, in addition to creating a potential failure to train liability argument.

Asking officers how they used the three critical thinking steps to evaluate claims at the end of a scenario-based training exercise is important for the trainer to fully understand how officers arrived at their conclusions. If one or more conclusions are faulty and cannot be substantiated, remedial review and instruction can be immediately given to those officers before immersing them in another situational-based scenario.

Public safety instructors must include critical thinking concepts, steps and skills in their educating and training of recruits and experienced colleagues. Incorporate into written lesson plans critical thinking definitions, concepts, evaluation steps, applications, possible consequences, and competency-based testing before instructing officers about critical thinking. Doing so will help to make recruits and officers better problem solvers, decision makers and also help to defeat plaintiff claims of failing to train officers in the core task of critical thinking.

Instruction in critical thinking must be viewed as a continuing process and not as a project . Simply providing a single lecture on the subject is not enough. Critical thinking must be reinforced daily through roll call training, by field training officers and by supervisors. Debriefing of incidents involving suspects or other claims which were evaluated and decided by officers is another excellent way to review critical thinking steps and how officers made judgments about those claims.

Experience

An officer’s experience may enhance or hinder his/her ability to think critically in a variety of situations. Officers with more life experience or with critical thinking training may develop better critically thinking skill sets and thus better decision-making than those officers with limited experience. Experience may include education and training. But, don’t be fooled by a colleague who boasts 20 years of “on the job” experience because, for some people, it is nothing more than one year of experience duplicated for 19 more years. Life experiences are often subjective, limited in scope and may not be good indicators of critical thinking skills. Many people can think of family members or colleagues who will not make decisions because they are afraid of making a mistake; do not want to be held accountable; or who simply cannot critically think about and evaluate the information given to them, thus prohibiting them from deciding. One must remember, however, that the failure to make a decision is a decision to not make one!

Organizational Culture

The organizational culture where officers work or are assigned may impact their critical thinking skills. Wheelen and Hunger (2006) defined organizational culture as “the collection of beliefs, expectations and values learned and shared by the [organization’s] members and transmitted from one generation of employees to another . . . and generally reflects the [leaders] and the mission of the [organization].” The organizational culture also includes the subcultures throughout the organization.

Have you ever worked for a strict, by the book supervisor, only to be promoted or transferred to another unit where the supervisor was disinterested or worse, telling everyone that, whatever you do, the supervisor will have your back? Some workshop lawyers and supervisors tell attendees or subordinates not to worry about using force because, with a consult, they can help with writing a report justifying it. Aside from being unethical, this attitude helps develop an unhealthy organizational subculture which can eliminate or dilute the importance of developing and using critical thinking skills.

Organizational subculture can be defined as the set attitudes and values which shape employee behavior. The subculture commands our attention because it is generally seen as a major obstacle to reform and, thus, a powerful force working to erode any reforms which are in fact achieved, such as education and training in critical thinking. Often within an organizational subculture, there are unwritten ground rules which produce the “actual” culture of the organization, unit and/or shift (e.g., in this unit, we do not follow policy). As previously mentioned, if officers know their supervisor will support them regardless of what they do, they may not practice critical thinking because event outcomes will not be viewed as negative by the supervisor.

Critical Thinking in Today’s Law Enforcement Environment

Every week, there are stories claiming public safety officers did not act when they should have acted (think Uvalde, Texas); acted when they should not have acted (think George Floyd); or did not critically think about their actions (think TASER ® deployment on a person drenched in gasoline). Increasingly, public safety officers are being criminally charged and civilly sued. It also appears that more officers are losing their criminal cases and being sent to jail (think Minneapolis officers who did not intervene and stop their supervisor’s force).

A growing number of states and municipalities are passing legislation which implicitly demands public safety officers critically think before acting or they may face criminal charges given a negative outcome (think death or serious injury). For example, in 2022, California Government Code Section 7286.5 changed regarding positional asphyxia. The law now requires law enforcement officers to reasonably monitor a person for signs of asphyxia. The law also prohibits agencies using or authorizing prisoner transport methods which involve a substantial risk of positional asphyxia. Obviously, training on positional asphyxia, asphyxia, asphyxiation, critical thinking, and the law must now be incorporated into the academy and in-service educational and training curricula.

Monitoring requirements for a restrained person involve an officer’s use of critical thinking skills. Should the restrained person claim breathing difficulty, the officer must decide if the claim is valid or if it is a trick to get the officer closer to them in order to attack. Similarly, officers must now critically think about how to position a prisoner for transport prior to the transport. Two Boulder County (CO) Sheriff’s Deputies were criminally convicted and are serving their jail sentences after a Boulder City officer asked them to transport a young male who was severely intoxicated. During the transport to an alcohol treatment center in a police van, the young man died.

Call to Action

Trainers, educators and administrators of public safety employees must educate and train learners, recruits and in-service personnel in the core task of critical thinking, including the steps involved in arriving at appropriate decisions, using a variety of topics with associated claims. Leadership and management must also continuously review these steps with subordinates so they remember and apply them. Examples may include using actual or hypothetical case studies, reviewing examples of poor judgment when facing claims, and so forth. Education and training on critical thinking must be an ongoing process . Employees need to be educated and trained about critical thinking concepts, and then be given the opportunity to apply the steps of critical thinking to evaluate a claim and to develop a conclusion, erring on the side of the claim, regardless of the organizational culture or subculture. Case studies and/or scenario-based training are two safe environments to evaluate critical thinking skills. Holding employees accountable without first educating and training them is unethical, unfair and morale depleting. In today’s changing society, employers, educators, trainers, leaders, and managers can no longer ignore the need for education and training about critical thinking and its application to hypothetical and to real claims, including assessing employee critical thinking skill sets, judgment and decision making.

John G. Peters, Jr., Ph.D. is a frequent contributor to Police and Security News . He serves as president of the internationally recognized training firm, Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, Inc., and as Executive Director of The Americans for Effective Law Enforcement. An instructional designer, John has developed online programs for several universities, including a course on critical thinking. He has taught leadership, management, critical thinking, research methods, and statistics at the undergraduate and graduate levels. A judicially qualified expert witness, he has testified in international (Hong Kong), federal and state courts about use of force, arrest-related deaths, training, and policies.

Inservice Information Request Form
Certification Online Course
The State of Critical Thinking Today
Higher Education
K-12 Instruction
Customized Webinars and Online Courses for Faculty
Business & Professional Groups
The Center for Critical Thinking Community Online
Certification in the Paul-Elder Approach to Critical Thinking
Professional Development Model - College and University
Professional Development Model for K-12
Workshop Descriptions
Online Courses in Critical Thinking
Critical Thinking Training for Law Enforcement
Consulting for Leaders and Key Personnel at Your Organization
Critical Thinking Therapy

Translate this page from English...

*Machine translated pages not guaranteed for accuracy. Click Here for our professional translations.

Critical Thinking Training for Law Enforcement Recruits, Officers, & Leaders

It is time to incorporate robust critical thinking into your law enforcement agency at this revolutionary time in our history, in which a more humane approach to law enforcement will be increasingly required. We are aware of the various discussions focused on de-escalating violent situations involving law enforcement interactions. However, revolutionizing how law enforcement agencies operate is not simple, since changing the way law enforcement officers think is not simple. It is only by incorporating mandatory fairminded critical thinking courses/programs into law enforcement training across the board that we can bring about the long-term permanent change needed to deal with the crisis at hand, and to move into a more compassionate and charitable future. Our fellows and facilitators can lead onsite workshops for your law enforcement agency, and we are happy to put together a proposal for online short courses on critical thinking for your police officers and leaders (based on your circumstances and setting). Your law enforcement agency, using training in explicit fairminded critical thinking, can become a model for law enforcement agencies and police academies across the nation.

Recruits, Officers, and Leaders in Our Online Courses and On-Site Training Programs Will:

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

Decision-making skills that encompass a critical thinking orientation for law enforcement professionals

2009, International Journal of Police Science & Management

INTRODUCTION Law enforcement and public safety pro-fessionals risk their lives daily to protect and save the general public from potential and immediate dangers. Since 1993, the United States has been affected by many domestic terrorist attacks (eg Timothy McVeigh and the ...

Related Papers

Laura Zimmerman

Robin Bryant

During the policing of a critical incident, and despite all the technology available, it is still people and not machines that make most of the important decisions. Police officers attempt to make sense of the circumstances that confront them, respond to developments and take control by making decisions using the most powerful and adept tool available to them: their brains. This chapter examines some of the innate forms of reasoning that police officers employ to make decisions during critical incidents. However, from the outset it should be acknowledged that reasoning is but one element within an individual or group’s decision-making repertoire during a critical incident. There is a widely accepted consensus within policing research that competent decision-making involves a combination of both general cognitive ability and domain-specific (e.g. occupational) understanding and skills, in which reasoning will play a major part, but only a part. We also limit this chapter to a discussion of the ‘how’ of innate reasoning within decision-making and say little on the ‘why’ or ‘when’.

International Journal of Educational Research

Hosea Abalaka Apeh

This study explored the role of age and gender in the critical thinking skills of trainees of Police institutions in Nigeria. The design adopted for this study was a descriptive survey design. The population of this study was 14,320 police trainees enrolled in various police training institutions in Nigeria. The random proportionate sampling strategy was used to select 375 respondents from the six (6) police training institutions comprising both male and female trainees. The instrument used to collect data for this study was the “Owolabi Critical Thinking Test (OCTT) (2011)” which is a standardised test. The reliability of the OCTT was established at 0.71 using the Cronbach’s alpha. Three research questions and two null hypotheses were raised to guide the study. In this study, mean scores and percentages were used for the analysis of the research questions. The hypotheses were tested at 0.05 level of significance using t-test. The findings showed poor critical thinking ability among...

Annals of Emergency Medicine

Pat Croskerry

Stephen A Morreale

Executives and managers of police agencies are depended upon to deal with crisis and change in their environments and in their organizations. The decisions made by these leaders are distinct from those on the spot decisions often made by law enforcement officers, correctional officers or court personnel in field situations. In most instances, there is time to reflect, assess and collect data in order to make more informed decisions. Unlike line-level personnel, administrators are most often positioned to engage in strategic and long-term decision-making as opposed to crisis-driven decision-making. Engaging in a systematic decision-making process can be beneficial if the process includes collecting and evaluating information and data, giving other stakeholders the opportunity to review and provide input, and reviewing previous “best practices” in organizational decision-making The paper sets forth the findings of a limited exploratory, qualitative study aimed at identifying processes used in decision-making by police administrators. The paper also includes recommendations to enhance the decision-making processes used by police administrators. By police administrators, we are referring to those individuals who have the authority to make policy in a police organization versus managers who are situated between the street-level staff and the organization administrator. The suggestion of strategic planning has overwhelming and negative connotations to many criminal justice practitioners. However, many of the tenants used for strategic planning have applicability to decision-making. By connecting the results of this exploration to theories of change and action, this paper identifies systematic approaches that can be used in the police administrator decision-making process. Overview

Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology

Metodi Hadji-Janev

Journal of Criminal Justice

Janet Starkes

Making decisions under stress: Implications for individual and team training.

Marvin Cohen

Journal of History Culture and Art Research

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Canan Yıldıran

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Vitalii Lunov

New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education

A. Steven Dietz

Pablo Pablo

Lovely Noel

European Law Enforcement Research Bulletin

Sérgio Felgueiras

Michel Girodo , Dr Girodo

Anne Helsdingen

Human Factors

Criminal Justice and Behavior

Geoffrey Alpert

Pavla Vrbkova

Crime & Delinquency

Larry Gaines

SOCIETY. INTEGRATION. EDUCATION. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference

Renata Šliažienė

Terry Bresnick

Dire Dawa management and Kaizen Institute 2021

Abiy Serawitu

Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Sztuki Wojennej

Agata Jądrzak

International journal of critical illness and injury science

sara shahbazi

PsycEXTRA Dataset

Critical Thinking: Using Social and Emotional Intelligence in Public Safety

by Rex Scism | December 23, 2022

I started working in law enforcement during the late 1980s. At that time, the agencies I worked for were located in busy jurisdictions where we ran from one call to the next. Like many organizations, we were shorthanded. Communication in the field was short and sweet. We took care of business and moved on to the next call for service without giving much thought to human relationships. Community policing was a relatively new term. We knew the importance of forging positive relationships. But time was the primary focus.

Fast-forward several decades and time is still an important factor when juggling the myriad responsibilities found in public safety. The relationship factor is equally important and effective communication is essential to accomplishing the mission. Early in my career, I was extremely task-oriented while handling calls and dealing with the public. As time went on, I realized there was much more to a call than a “ just the facts, ma’am ” approach. People want to be heard. But communication is complicated .

During the past decade we’ve heard more about social and emotional intelligence in public safety and how these competencies contribute to enhancing critical thinking, while helping us establish positive relationships. Now, public safety professionals are even required to attend training that focuses on developing these skills. But what are emotional and social intelligence really about and why are they necessary in today’s climate? To answer that question, we need to explore how these competencies directly relate to public safety.

Emotional Intelligence

Spiritual master Dr. Amit Ray is often quoted as saying, “Emotional intelligence is the foundation of leadership. It balances flexibility with toughness, vision with passion, compassion with justice.” Psychology Today defines emotional intelligence (EI) as “… the ability to identify and manage one’s own emotions, as well as the emotions of others.” Professor Gregory Saville stresses that becoming emotionally mature and confident are necessary prerequisites to influencing other people’s emotions.

It’s easy to get caught up in the minutia of a busy day while failing to consider the human dynamic that can make or break a situation.

It’s no mystery that today’s public safety professionals need to have well-developed human skills and be able to communicate effectively, while managing both inter- and intradepartmental relationships. Dr. David Black notes how “emotional intelligence isn’t something we’re born with; it’s a tactical skill set we must develop.” Dr. Michael Pittaro from American Military University takes it a step further and identifies four critical skills for developing social and emotional intelligence in public safety:

1. Self-Awareness : Requires knowing our own strengths, weaknesses, emotions and circumstances that impact how we feel in certain situations. 2. Self-Management: Involves controlling our emotions, especially in situations where we might spontaneously respond in a disruptive manner. It also includes self-monitoring and knowing when it’s appropriate to act. 3. Social Awareness : Requires empathy for the feelings, needs and concerns of others. This is a big factor in building rapport since it involves understanding a person’s mood or behavior in a way that improves the relationship. 4. Relationship Management : This expands on social awareness by developing bonds and making people feel supported and understood.

In public safety, social competencies such as conflict management , empathy and leadership are also important. These skill sets are required on nearly every call for service. There is a strong relationship between emotional intelligence and building trust in the communities we serve. And to make the most of this valuable competency, it’s also necessary to clearly understand complex social relationships—which in turn requires an understanding of social intelligence.

Social Intelligence

Bnidhu and Snigh’s research identified social intelligence (SI) as “the ability to understand the feelings, thoughts, and behaviors of persons, including oneself … and to act appropriately upon that understanding.” Simply put, SI refers to our ability to read other people and understand their intentions and motivations—making strong human connections. When human beings make these connections, they are better equipped to adjust to new situations or adopt alternative courses of action based on a variety of situationally dependent variables.

Savvy public safety professionals use this important competency on a daily basis without even thinking. But it’s important to note SI is another learned competency. We develop this skillset through experiences and interactions with people. As Dr. Ronald Riggio points out, we learn “from the successes and failures in social settings.” Some key elements of SI include:

Verbal fluency and conversational skills : This largely involves being tactful and appropriate—working or reading the room, as they say.
Knowing social roles, rules, and scripts : Also known as “playing the game,” this social intelligence element involves conforming to the unwritten rules or norms that govern how humans interact with one another in social or group settings.
Effective listening skills : Being a good listener goes without saying in this industry, but human beings are hardwired to care more about our own thoughts, opinions and feelings. In other words, we are selfish and must work to set aside our own basic needs to connect with others, especially in situations where emotions are at play.
Impression management : Those working in public safety are keenly aware of the importance of making a good impression. There is obviously a delicate balance between managing the image you portray and how it comes across to others. How you wear the uniform , your level of self-confidence, and skill competencies all play a role in how you professionally interact with both your peers and the public while on the job.

In public safety, we must be able to quickly adjust to new situations and adopt effective courses of action that allow us to connect with the people we serve. How do emotional intelligence and social intelligence competencies relate to critical thinking in public safety ?

The Relationship to Critical Thinking

Effective critical thinking requires us to overcome individual biases and false assumptions. How many times have you responded to a call for service and immediately drew conclusions about what occurred or hastily decided upon a necessary course of action, only to significantly change direction after hearing all the facts? We’ve all been there. Our experience and training largely contribute to our success, but it can also inhibit our ability to rationalize when we’re faced with new challenges in unfamiliar territory.

In public safety, social competencies such as conflict management, empathy and leadership are required on nearly every call for service.

As Phillips and Burrell point out, “critical thinking and effective problem-solving is an optimal process to reach well-thought-out decisions.” This level of analysis is paramount if we wish to actually solve a problem without settling on some mediocre alternative. And it requires us to have a strong understanding of our own capabilities relative to both social and emotional intelligence. Critical thinking allows us to:

Develop paths to reasoned judgment when variables in a situation change or evolve.
Understand how to build group consensus around complex issues (or at least engage in conversation directed toward problem resolution).
Learn to encourage and ensure consideration of breakthrough or “outside the box” ideas or thinking.

The key centers on enhancing our ability to solve problems constructively after careful consideration of rational alternatives. This also requires some level of analytical assessment as we determine which course of action is necessary for a given situation.

If we consider critical thinking from a social and emotional intelligence standpoint, we also need to deal with some internal noise. Factor in your own egocentrism and be realistic about the impact of individual emotions on decision making. We also need to be aware of group influences in our lives. Public safety professionals have a lot in common and it’s not unusual to develop behaviors that are encouraged within that group. This may or may not be beneficial when dealing with certain members of the public. Awareness is the key. As India yoga guru Sadhguru said, “When your mind is full of assumptions, conclusions, and beliefs, it has no penetration, it just repeats past impressions.”

Making Your Job Easier

Critical thinking often requires us to overcome what we think we know about a given situation and approach it with an open mind. This means not only managing our emotions and understanding the emotions of others, but also placing those emotions and feelings in the proper context. As with anything, it’s crucial we are self-aware of our own biases, our capacity to understand others, and the limitations to effective communication.

Although it’s tempting to rush through that next call for service in the interest of time, take a moment to slow down, regroup, and consider critical social and emotional competencies that I promise will make your job easier. Most of this is grounded in common sense, but it’s easy to get caught up in the minutia of a busy day while failing to consider the human dynamic that can make or break a situation.

Psychology Today . (nd). Emotional Intelligence. Accessed 11/19/22 from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/emotional-intelligence
Saville G. (2015) Emotional Intelligence in Policing. The Police Chief . Accessed 11/19/22 from https://tmctraining.net/wp-content/uploads/Article_PoliceChief-EI-in-Policing-Saville-2015.pdf.
Black D. (2022) The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Public Safety. Cordico . Accessed 11/19/22 from https://www.cordico.com/2022/05/04/role-of-emotional-intelligence-in-public-safety/ .
Pittaro M. (2017) How emotional intelligence benefits correctional officers. Corrections1 . Accessed 11/19/22 from https://www.corrections1.com/products/training-products/articles/how-emotional-intelligence-benefits-correctional-officers-6ZmCe3nVhX1CLFIF/ .
Bnidhu J. and Snigh P. (2022). The Structure and Cultivation of Social Intelligence. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities . 4(3):58.
Riggioi R. (2014) What is Social Intelligence? Why Does it Matter? Psychology Today . Accessed 11/19/22 from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cutting-edge-leadership/201407/what-is-social-intelligence-why-does-it-matter .
Phillips W and Burrell D. (2008) Decision-making skills that encompass a critical thinking orientation for law enforcement professionals. International Journal of Police Science and Management. 11(2).

CAPTAIN REX M. SCISM (Ret.) is a 32-year law enforcement veteran and former director of research and development for the Missouri State Highway Patrol. He also had a successful military career, retiring from the Missouri Army National Guard after 20 years of service. Mr. Scism served as a public safety and private sector consultant and instructor for over 20 years. He formerly served as an adjunct faculty member in the Department of Criminal Justice for both Columbia College and the University of Central Missouri, and is a frequent contributor to multiple sources about various public safety topics. Mr. Scism is a graduate of the FBI National Academy’s 249th Session and currently serves as a content developer for Lexipol.

Today’s Tip from Gordon Graham:

Don’t rush to clear the call, the briefing – your source for the latest blog articles, leadership resources and more, related posts.

Preserving Life: The Importance of Jail Suicide Prevention Training

Aug 22, 2024

Gary Cornelius

Preserving Life: The Importance of Jail Suicide Prevention Training

Panel Discussion: Suicide Awareness in the Fire Service

Aug 20, 2024

Lexipol Team

Panel Discussion: Suicide Awareness in the Fire Service

Aug 08, 2024

Greg Rogers

Fire Apparatus Crash Reduction

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

NCJRS Virtual Library

Decisionmaking skills that encompass a critical thinking orientation for law enforcement professionals, additional details, no download available, availability, related topics.

< Previous

Home > Student Works > GRADUATE_WORKS > ETD > 375

Electronic Theses and Dissertations

Critical thinking in law enforcement training academies: a phenomenological study of officer experiences.

Billy J. Spruill , Abilene Christian University Follow

Campus Location

Dallas Campus (Online)

Date of Award

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3116-7965

Document Type

Dissertation

Organizational Leadership

Degree Name

Doctor of Education

Committee Chair or Primary Advisor

Robert Haussmann

Second Committee Member or Secondary Advisor

Timothy Atkinson

Third Committee Member or Committee Reader

Dean Campbell

Recently, law enforcement officer use of force incidents resulting in death has seemingly become more prevalent. Generally, the educational requirement for a law enforcement officer is a high school diploma or general education development degree. One must question if this requirement is sufficient for a law enforcement officer to be successful in a modern world as the law enforcement training academy may be the law enforcement officer’s only postsecondary education. Critical thinking is a needed skill identified by high-stress professions such as the military, nursing, and disaster management, yet there is limited study regarding critical thinking in law enforcement. The purpose of this research study was to assess the efficacy of law enforcement training academies to prepare cadets to pass a state licensing examination successfully and prepare cadets to think critically upon entering their careers as law enforcement officers. This qualitative research study employed a transcendental phenomenological approach interviewing law enforcement officers with at least five years’ experience assigned to the patrol division of their agency. Participants were recruited from law enforcement agencies in the western region of Texas. Once consent was obtained, participants were scheduled for interviews. Interviews were completed using predeveloped interview questions designed to address the two research questions for this study. Interviews were transcribed, and the resulting data were analyzed utilizing the modified van Kaam method of phenomenological data analysis. This research study learned law enforcement training academies attended by participants focused on cadets’ passage of the state licensing examination and imparted limited critical thinking skills to cadets. These academies delivered information through a lecture-based teaching methodology with little hands-on application, which may explain the deficit in critical thinking skills.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License

Recommended Citation

Spruill, Billy J., "Critical Thinking in Law Enforcement Training Academies: A Phenomenological Study of Officer Experiences" (2021). Digital Commons @ ACU, Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 375. https://digitalcommons.acu.edu/etd/375

Since June 10, 2021

Included in

Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons , Other Education Commons

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately, you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.

Advanced Search

Notify me via email or RSS

Faculty Authors

Submit Research
Open Access FAQ

Student Authors

Graduate Submissions

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

Tactical decision making: An equation for critical thinking in moments of crisis

Use the tactical decision making equation to explain the process of how you arrived at your decision.

How often is legal liability the overwhelming factor in decision making, to the exclusion of situational needs or overall mission?

How often are decisions based on what was done in your most recent training -- or something you read about or did the last time you were in a similar situation, rather than really looking at the situation and figuring out the best way to handle it?

How many decisions are made based on a “tactical recipe” like the 21-foot “rule”?

Every day, officers face myriad situations on the street where they have to make decisions on how to proceed. Subjective terms like “use good judgment” or “common sense” are often used to describe the process of arriving at a successful decision. But what we need is an objective tool to measure success instead of basing actions on subjective standards.

What I am going to share with you is a tactical decision making equation in regards to critical thinking and decision making. Using this equation, you can explain the process of how you arrived at your decision, in lay terms, in any given situation.

Further, this equation can be used at any level of command, from a single individual on the street to a supervisor commanding a whole sector. It can be used for either law enforcement, military or civilian applications.

This equation can be used in a court of law and can be easily understood by a jury. You can break down the different components and lay out the circumstances in an organized fashion.

Good officers with “street smarts” use this equation subconsciously. In times when there is a difference of opinion about how to proceed in a given situation, putting things in a format such as this allows for clarification of key points that make the difference.

Tactical decision making equation

The equation is written as follows:

Risk vs. Need ÷ Time + Resources Available = Decision *

This equation is simple to look at. Its effects are profound in application. As you start to use it, you will find that it fits every situation you will come across and will give you a more concise way of evaluating situations in the field. As you gain experience in using it, your critical thinking and decision making skills will become more refined.

You won’t find yourself at a loss for words when you have to explain your actions in the aftermath of a situation. This is important as you recall the incident and have to write a report. You can go by the variables, step by step, and explain what you did and why.

Supervisors and trainers can use this equation to review actions by officers and look at the reasoning behind the decisions in an organized way.

Best of all, you don’t have to rely on a subjective standard (e.g., “common sense”) or a one-size-fits-all “tactical recipe” to defend your actions.

Let’s review the variables:

What are the risks associated with the various options available to you? Given the nature of the mission, are the risks acceptable and manageable? In general, the default is the lowest risk option that meets the needs of the mission. Liability risks are also part of this area.

What are the needs of the mission/situation that you are in? Why are you there? Is it an arrest, public safety issue, warrant service, military exercise, prisoner snatch, drug raid, etc.? What needs to be accomplished?

Is time on your side or working against you? In general, the shorter the time available to you to accomplish the mission, the higher the risk factors on the available options left.

Resources Available

What resources can you access during the mission/situation with the time available to you?

Needs of the mission, available options, associated risks, resources available in the time constraints and is time working for you or against you?

Using the equation:

Situation: Building search. Possibly armed subject in structure.

You have been tasked with performing a building search in response to an alarm. As you pull up to the scene, let’s pause for a moment and look at the needs of this mission.

Search, detain and arrest unlawful intruders.

Possibly armed subject(s), They have the advantage of cover/concealment and darkness.

With a perimeter secured, time is on your side.

You have a partner, a light, a handgun and a long gun in your car. The police K-9 is not available tonight as the handler is out of town doing training.

You conduct the search, with your partner, slicing the pie, taking advantage of your light, etc. As you come to a back room, you hear a noise that you suspect is a person.

You and your partner move forward. As you come to the doorway, you see a person standing in the room. You challenge him and he suddenly brings a gun around and fires a shot. You stand your ground and return fire as he fires at you. Neither of you hit the other. He ducks back to a corner of the room. You move back a few feet so he can’t shoot through the wall at you.

Applying the tactical decision making equation

Now what do you do?

Let’s look at the equation and go from there.

Risk vs. Need ÷ Time + Resources Available = Decision

Needs/Mission: Detain and arrest armed felon

Option 1: Leave the building and let someone else deal with it. Risk: None to the officer. Mission not fulfilled.

Option 2: Retreat to a secure corner with the entry to the room in view. Hold the corner with your partner. Call for SWAT, etc. Offender is contained and isolated in the room. No external window to the outside. If offender comes out of room, you have the advantage of holding the corner with two guns against his one. Risks: Higher than option one, but meet the needs of the situation.

Option 3: Move to the doorway with your partner. Attempt to take the fight to the subject from the doorway. Risks: Gunfight at close range. One or both of you may be killed or wounded in the exchange. Risk - Higher than Option 1 or 2.

Option 4: Do a dynamic entry with your partner and take the offender out. Risks: Very high when you close the distance.

Is on your side at the moment. He is in the room with no exits but the doorway.

Whatever knowledge, skills, training and abilities you and your partner can bring to bear that is relevant to the situation and will help you both manage the risk and accomplish the mission at hand. You have your weapons, ammo, flashlight, radio. Within a few minutes (or possibly up to an hour or more in rural locations) you can have more backup with more equipment.

Time is on your side. If you are a patrol officer doing a search it is helpful to think of yourself as a “scout.” You are there to ascertain presence of a subject and activity, not necessarily engage in a pitched battle. If you find someone, you don’t necessarily have to fight them. Just contain, isolate and use your best option that still accomplishes or furthers the completion of the intended mission. Option 2 offers the lowest risks at this point and will further the mission of containment and ultimate apprehension of the armed felon.

Situation: School shooting. Active shooter.

Needs/Mission : Stop the killing.

Additional tasks: Stabilize and evacuate the critically injured, protect, evacuate or control the student population. Control the perimeters. Here we can use the equation from both a command and a control standpoint and from an individual officer point of view.

Option 1: Contain the perimeter. Wait out the subjects. Risks: Lowest to officers but not to students. Does not meet the needs of the situation.

Option 2: Wait for 4 or more officers or SWAT team to deploy and then assault. Risks: Higher than Option 1 to officers. Students still at high risk. Time is ticking. Seconds count. People are dying. How long will you wait?

Option 3: Immediate assault with first available officers. Take the bad guys under fire and put them under duress. Take away their ability to think clearly. Isolate their mobility and rapidly neutralize them. Risks: Higher chance for officers to be wounded or killed. Higher chance of a “blue on blue” if other units are injected into the situation without good command and control. Best chance for survival to students that are not locked down in a protected area or haven’t managed to escape.

Here we have a situation where time is working against the officer. Students are being killed. Seconds count.

The knowledge and skill level of officers on scene at that time. Handgun and ammunition on belt, other items on belt such as pepper spray, baton, Taser, etc. Possibly long gun if not too far away. Protective vest. One other officer available immediately. Others responding. ETA 15 minutes. (ETA’s of more than an hour are common in rural parts of the US.)

A complex situation. Mission priorities have to be established immediately. First priority: Stop the killing, takes precedence over other mission needs. Other priorities are fulfilled as more personnel become available. Much room for discussion here. Reporting using the equations would lay out the variables in the aftermath and allow for clear, concise debriefing and testimony.

What will you decide?

Situation: Arrest-and-Control gone bad.

Needs/Mission : While on a domestic disturbance call you have contacted a large, belligerent subject in the parking lot. As you attempt to calm the situation, he suddenly assaults you. He gets you on the ground and gets on top of you, smashing blows down to your head and face. You now have a larger, stronger opponent on top of you. You are in a very vulnerable position.

Your mission has changed from defusing the situation or arresting the subject to a close quarter survival situation.

Option 1: Attempt to control the subject using whatever knowledge and skills you have at that time. Risk: One good blow to your face from a mounted opponent and it’s lights out for you. From there, your life is in the hands of the attacker. Are you really skilled? Remember, he’s got you down on the ground already and is in a position of advantage.

Option 2: Deploy a less lethal option from your belt. OC or Taser or baton. Risks: While you are reaching for your belt, you leave yourself open to a smashing attack from above. Taser at close range may not be effective. OC may be ineffective as well. Baton strikes from below may be very marginal in effectiveness. Time is working against you. Your life is at stake here.

Option 3: Protect your head and neck by re-positioning to the side. Trap his arm on that side and access lethal force tools available to aid you in your survival. Gun, backup gun, knife etc. Risks: You must be able to access your available tools without taking a debilitating blow or having the tool taken away and used against you.

Is working against you. One good blow to your head/face and your ability to protect yourself either goes away or is severely diminished.

Now, let’s throw in a wrinkle…

Your ground skills are not all that great. You did your last ground fighting skills training a year ago and haven’t done anything since. You successfully managed to get to a side position but your opponent is lying across your body and your Taser, OC and baton are covered by his body. Your only external weapon resource available in those few precious seconds of respite before he repositions is your firearm. No other officer is available at your location, though there are two in the parking lot 200 feet away contacting other parties to the incident.

You start your initial defense as you are taken to the ground with option one. The fight is on! He has gotten on top of you and is smashing you in the head repeatedly as you desperately try to defend yourself. You are using a lot of energy to keep him at bay. You are rapidly approaching physical exhaustion. You stop thinking of it as an arrest-and-control situation and are in fear for your life. You proceed with Option 3. You reposition your body and trap his arm nearest your gun .You bring the gun to bear and shoot him through the arm and body; ending the conflict.

In this situation, you can clearly articulate why you used the firearm even when you had other resources on your belt.

Let’s review the equation in the aftermath of the encounter to explain your actions.

Your mission changed from arrest-and-control to the need to protect your life. You were stuck in an extremely vulnerable position with a physically superior opponent in terms of size and strength and you were being attacked with deadly force. You were not able to control the subject using your current physical skills and training.

In each of the various options the risk was very high for serious bodily injury or death to you.

Working against you. You were physically exhausted and moments away from helplessness. In split seconds an incapacitating blow would likely have come down and taken you out of the fight.

Physical ability, skills and training, tools on belt.

Your physical resources were waning. As you rapidly tired, fighting to survive, you could feel the situation becoming more desperate. Your opponent was clearly winning this fight on a physical level. The only tool you could access, from your position and your opponent’s position, in the few seconds allowed, was your firearm. This might also be your backup firearm if he was lying across your primary weapon. Option 3 sounds best to me, given this situation.

Training to use this equation under duress is the real key to good decision making. People tend to default to whatever first comes to mind when they are put under pressure. A lot of the time, you will find yourself scratching your head trying to figure out why people do the things they do.

Immediate action drills are great when you are surprised and need to survive the first moments of a crisis. But nothing beats critical thinking skills in the moment for superior performance. This formula, and the critical thinking skills it develops, can help ahead of time in training scenarios, at the moment of truth when lives hang in the balance, and afterward when you have to articulate and justify your actions.

I would like to thank my advisory council members (Rocky Mountain Tactical Institute) for their timely input and advice in putting together this piece. Thanks to all!

* (From The Rocky Mountain Tactical Institute - Non-Profit 501(c) (3) Standards and Guidelines for Training (2007), Tactical Decision Making Equation. Copyright: Ronald E. Avery)

This article, originally published on May 09, 2007, has been updated.

2019 – MCJA Mandatory: Critical Thinking in Law Enforcement

by Meaghan O'Leary | Aug 20, 2020

This training is based upon, and consistent with: MCJA 2019 Mandatory Lesson Plan: Critical Thinking in Law Enforcement

Instructional Goal

It is vitally important for law enforcement officers to be objective when dealing with any given situation. By thinking critically about the facts before them, officers can avoid making errors in judgement about the situation. Utilizing critical thinking techniques allows for decision making, not allowing previous experiences, biases, shortcuts, or rationalizing inappropriate actions to get in the way of a possible better outcome for the call for service they are handling.

Performance Objectives

1.1.1 Define critical thinking as it relates to Law Enforcement.

1.1.2 Identify three benefits of critical thinking.

1.1.3 List three influences that affect critical thinking.

1.1.4 Identify 5 obstacles to critical thinking.

1.1.5 List the 4 components of Emotional Intelligence.

1.1.6 Explain the relationship between stress and Critical Thinking ability.

Username or Email Address

Remember Me

Practitioner
Organization
EBP Monthly
EBP Quarterly
Event Updates
Continued Education
Conferences
Frontline Pathway
Leadership Pathway
MI Skills Day
Supervisors
Faculty Guidelines
Joyfields Institute
Request Demo
Masterclasses
Schedule-A-Mentor
Login/Sign In

Improvements in Policing: It’s Not Only What We Train, but How We Train

Teresina g. robbins university of new haven.

Though concerns about police use of force did not begin with the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, this event seems to have been the catalyst for 6 years of increasing calls for justice for the deaths of unarmed men, particularly Black men, at the hands of police. Advocates of the Black community have called for defunding or abolition of the police establishment. Others have argued that there is a need for a dramatic overhaul of police training – particularly with regard to racial bias and the use of force. The House of Representatives addressed the call for changes in policing training and passed H.R. 1280. The bill aims to reduce religious and racial profiling through various means, including police training. This policy brief reviews the research on these issues and offers several policy suggestions. I argue that moving from a paramilitary structure to a more conducive learning environment and applying a learner-centered approach to aspects of law enforcement training is a justified starting point for re-establishing police legitimacy and a reduction in misuse of force. This brief is intended for those in charge of decision-making for law enforcement training.

On April 20, 2021, a jury convicted former police officer Derek Chauvin in the murder of George Floyd. While arresting Floyd for an allegedly fraudulent twenty-dollar bill, Chauvin put Floyd in a prone position on the ground, and then put his knee on Floyd’s neck for over nine minutes. Chief Arradondo said Chauvin “should have stopped” as soon as Floyd stopped resisting, and “certainly when he was in distress…” (Griffith, 2021). The verdict culminated a historic series of Black Lives Matter protests across the country. These protests were not just for Floyd, but for what supporters argue is embedded racism in law enforcement and a lack of accountability. George Floyd was not the first unarmed Black person to die at the hands of the police. Still, his death and Chauvin’s conviction seem to have opened the floodgates for open acknowledgment of the problems plaguing policing in the United States.

Calls for change range from improved training to abolishing police altogether, with the defunding movement falling somewhere in the middle. In an Op-ed for Cosmopolitan , American Civil Liberties Union Policing Policy Advisor Paige Fernandez (2021) argued that government officials should divert funding from law enforcement budgets and invest in programs like job training and violence reduction. On the other hand, abolitionists say these are merely steps to dismantle and rebuild what society thinks is policing, in part because simple reform allows for appeasement without demonstrable change in underlying issues (McDowell & Fernandez, 2018). Expectedly, however, there is a great deal of pushback on these critical stances. Nationally, Congressional bill 1280, also known as the “George Floyd Justice in Policing Act 2020,” focuses on reform through transparency and accountability, and requires de-escalation and implicit bias training. This paper focuses on just one section of H.R. 1280, Title III: Improving Police Training and Policies, cited as the “End Racial and Religious Profiling Act 2021 (ERRPA)”.

The plans outlined in the bill are well-intentioned, though vague and superficial. The suggestions to train law enforcement personnel on data collection, racial profiling issues, and profiling prevention do have merit, but also feel like political theater. At best, progressive agencies will continue to use evidence-informed best practices, and at worst, agencies will do nothing. Therefore, this brief intends to aid police departments in making a meaningful bridge between policy and practice. I do this first by addressing the current state of police training. Specifically, I will discuss the current state of law enforcement training in the United States. Second, I summarize the research on three types of training: implicit bias, procedural justice, and de-escalation. The summary is followed by a discussion of the different approaches to teaching recruits. I then provide three policy options addressing the advantages and disadvantages for each. Empirical research is used to support recommendations for law enforcement agencies.

Current State of Police Training

There has been a great deal of recent discussion about what we should train cops, but little on how we should prepare them. This section begins with an overview of current police training in the United States. Then I summarize the research on three types of training: implicit bias, procedural justice, and de-escalation. Finally, I discuss the theory of andragogy and its focus on a learner-centered approach, before introducing policy options.

Police Training Today

In this section, I focus on the models under which recruits learn and the time spent on use of force training. About 81% of police recruits train under a stress model embedded in the curriculum (Reaves, 2016). Stress models are similar to military training, where the focus is on performing under periods of stress, including strict rules, exercise as punishment, and insults (Chappell & Lanza-Kaduce, 2010). When it comes to the use of force, recruits spent about 71 hours on firearms training, but 21 hours on the use of force. It is essential to point out that those 21 hours may include policies, de-escalation tactics, and crisis intervention strategies.

What We Know: Training

Recently, the Council on Criminal Justice’s (CCJ) Task Force on Policing (2021a; 2021b; 2021c) compiled a set of reports analyzing the most critical and rigorous research on training commonly cited as necessary to decreasing use of force and racial biases in police officers and departments. The following sections summarize the findings and policy implications of implicit bias, procedural justice, and de-escalation training based on the CCJ reports and other research.

Implicit Bias

Implicit bias affects how someone acts or makes decisions, often based on stereotypes, and is different from blatant racism in that it is an unconscious reaction. Given the topic of this brief, it is useful to illustrate an example with race. Implicit bias affects how an officer reacts to a Black male and a White male in the same situation. The goal of implicit bias training is to help officers slow down and acknowledge these potential biases before acting. However, researchers question the efficacy of implicit bias training (Spencer et al., 2016), particularly for long-term gains (Lai et al., 2014, 2016). Others argue that it can do more harm than good (Bagenstos, 2018). Ultimately, the CCJ suggests that procedural justice and de-escalation training might be a more effective way to reduce force, given the minimal evidence of the effectiveness of implicit bias training (CCJ: Task Force on Policing, 2021b)

Procedural Justice

Procedural justice involves fairness, transparency, impartiality, and room for individuals to have a voice (COPS Office, n.d.), a reasonable request for police-community interactions. In general, the goal of procedural justice is for anyone with contact with police, from victims to suspects, to feel that police treated them fairly and provided the opportunity to explain their side of the story. Equity in treatment is significant given the current issues with police legitimacy in Black and Brown communities.

There is little evidence that procedural justice improves problems with racial disparity, but there is growing evidence that it increases trust, thereby increasing police legitimacy (CCJ, 2021c). The CCJ further argues that agencies should combine external procedural justice with internal procedural justice to be effective and partnered with increased de-escalation training to see improvements in misuse of force.

De-escalation

In an earlier policy brief, Geyer (2020) recommended three solutions for officer-involved shootings, with her research supporting a recommendation that agencies significantly increase de-escalation training. The CCJ (2021a) review supports Geyer’s (2020) arguments and suggests combining training with department policy reinforces the importance of reducing use of force incidents – both in number and severity. However, in a recent systematic review of de-escalation training evaluations, Engel and colleagues (2020) argue that most available research suffers from a lack of quality. Therefore, they are cautious in saying that de-escalation training works. They call for academics, practitioners, and funders to prioritize rigorously designed de-escalation studies and other training that can affect the use of force.

Summary of Training Types

Overall, procedural justice and de-escalation training are the most promising avenues for future police training and legitimacy improvements. What stands out when considering why implicit bias training has not been shown to be effective, while procedural justice and de-escalation training are more promising, are their delivery methods. Implicit bias training was primarily handled in a classroom setting, while procedural justice and de-escalation training involved more hands-on practical training (CCJ: Task Force on Policing, 2021a, 2021c, 2021b). These student-centered methods are more akin to the adult learning theory of andragogy.

Andragogy and Learner-Centered Approaches

Traditionally, instructors taught police recruits through behavioral and cognitive approaches to learning. The behavioral approach assumes that repetition is the key to understanding. The cognitive approach is akin to a lecture style where the instructor imparts their wisdom to their (hopefully) attentive students. While this may be excellent for learning the basics, it does not allow for the advancement of critical thinking and problem-solving skills (Birzer & Tannehill, 2001).

Much of the discussion on learner-centered approaches focus on community policing (Birzer & Tannehill, 2001; Chappell & Lanza-Kaduce, 2010), likely because student-centered approaches can improve critical thinking and problem-solving skills necessary for community policing (Belur et al., 2019). The concepts are still relevant outside the community policing paradigm, such as mundane encounters with community members and for use in de-escalation. The behavioral and cognitive learning approaches used in many academies are appropriate for learning mechanical tasks like conducting a traffic stop, investigation, or writing a report (Birzer, 2003). They are also perfectly valid for firearms training. However, police spend most of their time on non-violent service calls where mechanical skills are unnecessary, but communication and problem-solving important (Asher & Horwitz, 2020).

Policy Options

The section above provided an overview of the current state of law enforcement training and a summary of the research on the efficacy of various training to reduce misuse of force and improve police legitimacy. I also introduced the theory of andragogy and how it can apply to policing. Given the evidence base available on effective and promising training options, and how andragogy is applied to policing, there are three policy options. Each option includes policy options on structure, learning approach, and time spent on de-escalation and procedural justice training.

Policy Option 1

Structure : retain the paramilitary structure
Learning approach : behavioral/cognitive only
Curriculum : retain current curriculum

Policy Option 2

Learning approach : behavioral/cognitive for mechanical; student-centered for critical thinking and problem solving

Policy Option 3

Structure : Reduce paramilitary structure
Curriculum : increase time spent on procedural justice and de-escalation

Considerations

Policy option 1 .

Policy option one retains the paramilitary structure and behavioral learning approach, but with renewed curriculum, including increased procedural justice and de-escalation hours.


· Less for department and personnel to “buy into”	· Business as usual, but with additional training
· Limited cost	· Unsupportive environment to develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills
· Improved police legitimacy	· Adding hours to de-escalation when the research has not settled on its effectiveness
· Potential for reduced use/misuse of force

Policy option two retains the paramilitary structure and behavioral learning approach for mechanical tasks, but uses a student-centered approach for critical thinking and problem-solving. This option also calls for a change in the curriculum by increasing hours in procedural justice and de-escalation.


· Allows for recruits to take an active role in learning	· Somewhat unsupportive environment to develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills
· Potential for improvements in critical thinking and problem-solving	· Adding hours to de-escalation when the research has not settled on its effectiveness
· More supportive environment than policy option one	· Potential buy-in issues
· Improved police legitimacy	· Trainers need training in learner-centered approaches
· Potential for reduced use/misuse of force

Policy option three reduces the paramilitary structure by creating an environment that is more conducive to learning, but retains a behavioral learning approach for mechanical tasks. This option also calls for a shift to a student-centered approach for critical thinking and problem solving and a change in the curriculum by increasing procedural justice and de-escalation hours.


· Allows for recruits to take an active role in learning	· Added costs (training, consultation for curriculum development)
· Improvements in critical thinking and problem-solving	· Buy-in
· A supportive environment conducive to developing critical thinking and problem-solving skills	· Must develop curriculum
· Improved police legitimacy	· Trainers need training in learner-centered approaches
· Potential for reduced use/misuse of force

Recommendation

The policy recommendations in this brief are merely a starting point for improving the state of police training and regaining legitimacy from the communities they serve. Tensions are high, and opinions are emotionally charged. The situation is systemic and more complex than presented in this brief. Still, there cannot be progress without forward momentum. Such improvement should be evidence-informed and planned. Therefore, after reviewing the current state of available literature and the potential for actual change, I recommend agencies adopt policy option three. Policy option three includes the following changes: (1) reduce the paramilitary and stress-based structure of police academies in favor of a more conducive learning environment, (2) embed andragogy and student-centered learning for critical thinking and problem-solving skill development, and (3) increase the time spent on procedural justice and de-escalation training.

Why Reduce the Paramilitary Model?

Overall the paramilitary model does not provide an opportunity for self-directed or empowered learning (Birzer, 2003). The use of the paramilitary model is counterintuitive given the discretion afforded to police officers who are entirely self-directed in the field. The strict obedience required in the academy is also counterintuitive to developing skills that translate to improved community relationships (Chappell & Lanza-Kaduce, 2010). Learning under such stress helps teach recruits how to perform in stressful situations, but not at the expense of developing other essential skills.

Why Balance Behavioral, Cognitive, and Student-Centered Approaches?

It is important to remember that these learning types are not dichotomous, nor is one necessarily better than the other (Dwyer & Laufersweiler-Dwyer, 2004). As mentioned in the background section, behavioral and cognitive approaches to learning are perfectly acceptable for mechanical tasks. At the same time, andragogy is better suited to developing critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Further, this may encourage recruits to take an active role in their learning (Birzer & Tannehill, 2001). Ultimately, I suggest keeping the behavioral and cognitive approach where it applies best and using student-centered learning when there is a need for critical thinking or problem-solving.

Advantages and Challenges

There will be implementation challenges. One must consider that curriculum needs to be developed, and instructors must be adequately trained (see Shipton, 2011). While the paramilitary structure is also not conducive for critical thinking, police academies have a long tradition of using this method, so resistance is expected. Finally, agencies may also be concerned with costs. Already facing economic issues coupled with calls for defunding, departments may be reluctant to invest money into making such sweeping changes.

Despite these challenges, the advantages outweigh the costs. With proper implementation of an environment that supports effective learning (Birzer, 2003), departments can expect improved critical thinking and problem-solving(Belur et al., 2019). Properly incorporating procedural justice can help improve community relationships and police legitimacy – provided agencies also embrace internal procedural justice (CCJ, 2021c). And finally, though more research is needed, de-escalation, coupled with that procedural justice, may reduce the use and misuse of force (CCJ: Task Force on Policing, 2021a; Engel et al., 2020; Geyer, 2020).

On a final note, this policy brief is not an exhaustive discussion of the changes needed to ensure successful training of police recruits, improve police legitimacy, or reduce misuse of force. This brief focused on structure, types of training, and how we train. I do not address the necessary cultural shifts and other necessary policy changes here, which are also relevant. Instead, I chose to limit focus as a starting point. There is much more work to do.

Annotated Bibliography

Asher, J., & Horwitz, B. (2020, June 19). How do the police actually spend their time? The New York Times . https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/19/upshot/unrest-police-time-violent-crime.html

The article addresses the time police spend on various calls for service. Using publicly available data, the authors found that police spend more time responding to noncriminal complaints and traffic incidents than violent crime. While the authors only used data from ten agencies, the information demonstrates the importance of considering what types of activities police spend their time on when debated the best way to handle current shortcomings.

Bagenstos, S. R. (2018). Implicit bias’s failure. Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law , 39 (1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3015031

Bagenstos argues that the rise of implicit bias may have made addressing discrimination more complex from a political perspective. He further asserts that implicit bias triggers a similar defensive response as accusations of blatant racism, making it challenging to address discrimination. The article is an excellent read for anyone interested in an opposing perspective of implicit bias.

Belur, J., Agnew-Pauley, W., McGinley, B., & Tompson, L. (2019). A systematic review of police recruit training programmes. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice . https://doi.org/10.1093/police/paz022

In a systematic review of the global literature on police recruit training programs, the authors suggest that student-centered learning approaches help recruits develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills. This review is an excellent summary of the training research and is valuable for academics and practitioners alike.

Birzer, M. L. (2003). The theory of andragogy applied to police training. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management , 26 (1), 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1108/13639510310460288

The author explores the theory of andragogy applied to police training and argues that a student-centered approach is best suited for aspects of policing that require critical thinking and problem-solving skills. It is a must-read for those interested in making improvements in policing training.

Birzer, M. L., & Tannehill, R. (2001). A more effective training approach for contemporary policing. Police Quarterly , 4 (2), 233–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/109861101129197815

Birzer and Tannehill focus on what police trainers can do to improve learning outcomes for recruits. They suggest student-centered learning through andragogy fosters critical thinking and problem-solving skills by keeping officers engaged in the learning process. I highly recommend this article for policing instructors in academia and the police academy.

Council on Criminal Justice: Task Force on Policing. (2021a). De-escalation policies and training . [Policy Assessment]. Council on Criminal Justice. https://assets.foleon.com/eu-west-2/uploads-7e3kk3/41697/de-escalation_training.9f4b662e97c2.pdf

This policy assessment summarizes relevant literature on de-escalation training and evaluates its effectiveness in two areas relevant to this paper's topic: police misuse of force and strengthening community trust. The authors found that de-escalation training combined with de-escalation policies can reduce misuse of force. They further argue that a reduction in misuse in force may lead to improved community trust. The assessment is especially relevant for practitioners who do not have time to review a mountain of research or cannot access academic journals.

Council on Criminal Justice: Task Force on Policing. (2021b). Implicit bias training . [Policy Assessment]. Council on Criminal Justice. https://assets.foleon.com/eu-west-2/uploads-7e3kk3/41697/implicit_bias.9681943c82c2.pdf

The policy assessment referenced summarizes the empirical literature on implicit bias training. The authors found that there is limited evidence that implicit bias training reduces misuse of force and does not strengthen community trust on its own. However, they acknowledge that pairing implicit bias with reconciliation conversations may lead to improved community trust. The assessment is especially relevant for practitioners who do not have time to review a mountain of research or cannot access academic journals.

Council on Criminal Justice: Task Force on Policing. (2021c). Procedural justice training . [Policy Assessment]. Council on Criminal Justice. https://assets.foleon.com/eu-west-2/uploads-7e3kk3/41697/procedural_justice_training.234ca94dfcf5.pdf

In summarizing the empirical literature on procedural justice training, the authors found some support that procedural justice, coupled with de-escalation tactics, reduces misuse of force. They also note that the evidence suggests a strong association between community perceptions of police interactions. Given the goals of procedural justice, it would not be surprising to see improved relationships. However, they note perceptions go beyond individual encounters with police. The assessment is especially relevant for practitioners who do not have time to review a mountain of research or cannot access academic journals.

Chappell, A. T., & Lanza-Kaduce, L. (2010). Police academy socialization: Understanding the lessons learned in a paramilitary-bureaucratic organization. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography , 39 (2), 187–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241609342230

This observational study focused on the socialization of police officers in one academy that introduced a new community policing and problem-solving curriculum. The relevant findings for this brief are that the paramilitary structure of the police academy is not conducive to critical thinking and problem-solving.

Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice. (n.d.). Procedural justice, COPS Office . Retrieved April 23, 2021, from https://cops.usdoj.gov/prodceduraljustice

The procedural justice section on the COPS Office website offers resources on procedural justice and its connections to community policing and police legitimacy. The website is a good starting point for anyone with an interest in learning more about this topic.

Dwyer, R. G., & Laufersweiler-Dwyer, D. (2004). The need for change: A call for action in community oriented police training perspective. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin , 73 (11), 18–24.

The authors explore pedagogy and andragogy applied to police training - mainly community-oriented police training. They argue that an integrated model is preferable, given officers must learn mechanical and critical thinking skills. This article provides an excellent argument for integrated teaching methods in police training.

Engel, R. S., McManus, H. D., & Herold, T. D. (2020). Does de-escalation training work? Criminology & Public Policy , 19 (3), 721–759. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12467

In a systematic review of de-escalation training, Engel and colleagues found no adverse effects of de-escalation training. They note that many of the studies reviewed had low-quality designs, making it difficult to evaluate the training's effectiveness. This article is timely and brings to light the importance of rigorous research in policymaking.

Fernandez, P. (2021, April 13). Defunding the police isn’t radical. It’s logical . Cosmopolitan. https://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a32757152/defund-police-black-lives-matter/

This opinion editorial takes the perspective of critical criminology to argue the logic behind defunding police and reallocating the money to other public services. The author posits that such a broken institution cannot be improved but must be dismantled and rebuilt. I recommend reading this article regardless of where your opinion falls on this topic.

Geyer, P. (2020). Traveling at 1000 feet per second with unalterable consequences: How to decrease police officer-involved shootings. EBP Quarterly , 5 (2). https://www.ebpsociety.org/blog/quarterly/440-ebp-quarterly-2020-volume-5-number-2

In this policy brief, Geyer addresses potential policies to decreases office-involved shootings. She ultimately argues for a dramatic increase in de-escalation training. This piece would be most beneficial for law enforcement decision-makers interested in making changes to their training curriculum.

Griffith, J. (2021, April 13). Former officer testifies Derek Chauvin was “justified” in pinning down George Floyd . NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/prosecutors-rest-their-case-derek-chauvin-trial-n1263916

This NBC News article summarizes events from the trial of Derek Chauvin in the murder of George Floyd. It highlights the contradictory testimony between department personnel and expert witnesses. While the title is provocative, the article provided a good summary of the testimony of interest.

Lai, C. K., Marini, M., Lehr, S. A., Cerruti, C., Shin, J.-E. L., Joy-Gaba, J. A., Ho, A. K., Teachman, B. A., Wojcik, S. P., Koleva, S. P., Frazier, R. S., Heiphetz, L., Chen, E. E., Turner, R. N., Haidt, J., Kesebir, S., Hawkins, C. B., Schaefer, H. S., Rubichi, S., … Nosek, B. A. (2014). Reducing implicit racial preferences: A comparative investigation of 17 interventions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 143 (4), 1765–1785. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036260

The authors sought to determine which methods were effective in reducing implicit bias. Eight of seventeen interventions reduced implicit bias, while the remaining nine did not. Most important for this paper, however, is the remaining question of long-term gains. This article could benefit those trying to design implicit bias interventions in police training.

Lai, C. K., Skinner, A. L., Cooley, E., Murrar, S., Brauer, M., Devos, T., Calanchini, J., Xiao, Y. J., Pedram, C., Marshburn, C. K., Simon, S., Blanchar, J. C., Joy-Gaba, J. A., Conway, J., Redford, L., Klein, R. A., Roussos, G., Schellhaas, F. M. H., Burns, M., … Nosek, B. A. (2016). Reducing implicit racial preferences: II Intervention effectiveness across time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 145 (8), 1001–1016. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000179

Researchers assessed the interventions' success at sustained reductions in bias due to earlier implicit bias intervention work. Their findings suggest there remain concerns about long-term change. As with Lai et al.'s previous work, this article would benefit those working on designing implicit bias interventions for police training.

McDowell, M. G., & Fernandez, L. A. (2018). ‘Disband, disempower, and disarm’: Amplifying the theory and practice of police abolition. Critical Criminology , 26 (3), 373–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10612-018-9400-4

The authors discuss the police abolitionist movement from a critical criminology perspective. McDowell and Fernandez make a powerful argument that aims directly at dismantling police as an institution allows for movement toward meaningful change. While antagonistically worded for traditional criminologists, I recommend all policing scholars read their work.

Reaves, B. A. (2016). State and local law enforcement training academies, 2013, summary . Bureau of Justice Statistics. https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/slleta13.pdf

The above is a statistical report from the Bureau of Justice Statistics that highlights various aspects of state and local law enforcement training academies. I used the information on stress versus non-stress academy models and the number of hours spent on training types to support the policy recommendations in this brief. The report is beneficial for academics, practitioners, and community members to understand the most recent snapshot of the average police training academy.

Shipton, B. (2011). Expanding police educators’ understanding of teaching, are they as learner-centered as they think? Journal of Learning Design , 4 (2), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.5204/jld.v4i2.71

In this study, the researcher sought to determine whether police educators favored learner-centered or teacher-centered approaches. Due to contradictory findings, Shipton argues that police educators need more development courses that allow them to reflect on their actual practices regarding their desire teaching approach. I recommend this piece for anyone involved in instructor development for police academies.

Spencer, K. B., Charbonneau, A. K., & Glaser, J. (2016). Implicit bias and policing. Social and Personality Psychology Compass , 10 (1), 50–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12210

The authors address the difficulty in reducing the effects of implicit bias. They argue that there are no known interventions with any efficacy. I suggest policing scholars read this article and reflect on the several promising avenues for future research to reduce implicit bias.

Photo by Sam Clarke on Unsplash

Blog Categories

News & Announcements
Continued Evidence-Based Education

Recent Articles

Monthly Publication of the Evidence-Based Professionals Society

Evidence-Based Professionals' Monthly - August 2024

Evidence-Based Professionals' Monthly - July 2024

Evidence-Based Professionals' Monthly - June 2024

Evidence-Based Professionals' Monthly - May 2024

Understanding the Criminal Pathways of Victimized Youth

The Price of Punishment: Exclusionary Discipline in Connecticut PreK-12 Schools

Breaking the Cycle of Absenteeism: Strategies for Prevention

Evidence-Based Professionals' Monthly - March 2024

Evidence-Based Professionals' Monthly - April 2024

Get Your Free Article to...

"Becoming An Evidence-Based Organization (EBO)

Five Key Components To Consider" by David L. Myers, PhD.

Would You Like To Set Your Leadership Apart from The Typical?

"Becoming An Evidence-Based Practitioner (EBP)

How To Set Yourself Apart" By Mark M. Lowis, MINT

Would You Like To Set Your Yourself Apart from The Typical Practitioner?

Masterclass Options

We offer a Masterclass & Certification for LEADERS and PRACTITIONERS. Which are you interested in exploring?

Discussion as a Strategy for Educating Law Enforcement Officers

Featured Articles
Legal Digest
Perspective
Additional Articles

By Cynthia L. Lewis, Ed.D.

A stock image of a group of people talking.

Law enforcement officers (LEOs) face an ever-changing landscape of local and global challenges. They continually must hone their skills and gather knowledge to confront these issues and protect the public. Officers can benefit by participating in training and educational opportunities with other police professionals.

To this end, effective discussion in the classroom can help officers develop better practices in their own agencies and communities. Instructors often use a lecture format in traditional adult learning environments, but retention increases when students actively engage.

Discussion is one teaching method that may help better prepare students to think critically and resolve problems efficiently. It allows them to explore ideas and perspectives from another’s unique point of view and, thus, develop a deeper understanding of the thought processes of others. Classroom conversations help officers cultivate empathy toward other individuals and cultures and reevaluate their own mind-set regarding particular topics.

Opinions vary on what effective classroom discussions look like. Some instructors view dialogue with little or no interaction from the facilitator as more productive, while others deem guidance necessary to ensure that class members do not deviate too far from the main topic.

Dr. Lewis is an instructor at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia.

Students prefer to become actively involved in their learning and use their experiences as a resource for others. 1 Many components of law enforcement training now include andragogical, or self-directed and practice-based, approaches to address the needs and interests of LEOs. 2 Such changes in curriculum help officers prepare for what they will encounter in community policing as well. For example, discussions and role-plays develop interpersonal and oral communication skills that LEOs need in real-life situations.

Instructors who typically teach large groups can modify their lecture outlines to incorporate these modern techniques. Passive learners in such a classroom size may benefit from integrating discussion for active learning. Such collaboration among officers can result in students—

communicating expertise;
identifying current topics or trends;
developing critical thinking skills through possible conflict;
acknowledging uncertainty; and
empowering others.

Facilitation

Educators may engage students by employing such teaching strategies as debate or question and answer. They should feel comfortable with silence to give students time to process and respond. To manage this dialogue successfully, instructors often begin by sharing their own experiences, which requires effective communication skills and the ability to develop rapport with students.

Instructors need to share their opinions and beliefs without offending students and understand the importance of showing that they care about them. Further, by affirming officers’ views and ideas as valuable, they encourage healthy discussion by eliminating judgment and ensuring no student responses are minimized.

Some educators make an unexpected statement to help prompt alternative viewpoints. They also could present opposing stances and deliberately provoke discussion by debating common beliefs. LEOs who participate in these exchanges may increase their knowledge of a subject or change their perspective and opinion. 3 Instructors can ask students to assume the opposite of their preferred stance on a topic and argue in support of something they do not believe in, which can help them understand how others see an issue. 4

Debates regarding the numerous controversial subjects related to law enforcement allow officers to share experiences and knowledge and develop critical thinking skills. LEOs may have strong opinions about certain issues and readily agree to debate them from their point of view.

Instructors always should have a clearly defined objective so students know the end teaching point. For a productive discussion, subjects should hold relevance for the majority of the students and offer them the opportunity to see themselves in certain situations that might not have occurred yet in their organization. Instructors must plan for the dialogue before class and advise LEOs to prepare what they will share in the classroom discussion. Students who have materials to read prior to a discussion can start to think a particular way and contribute more to the conversation.

Educators who answer the questions and solve the problems may stifle discussion and limit facilitation. In such cases, LEOs may not challenge others’ ideas and, thus, limit shared experiences and learning. Although instructors are subject-matter experts, they must not dominate discussions but instead emphasize their role as facilitator.

Exposure to directly oppositional perspectives and opinions in a relaxed, safe classroom environment can foster officers’ ability to assess or reevaluate situations. This may positively affect the way they interact with others and resolve issues.

With any instructional method, educators will encounter difficulties. Those who can recognize and manage four specific barriers related to classroom dialogue will be better prepared when they occur.

First, students’ personalities may prove a possible barrier to classroom discussion. Some students are perhaps too eager to share their experiences, while others prefer to have conversations one-on-one, rather than in front of a large group. Other students may be more outspoken with a lot of conviction in their beliefs. Instructors who lack a firm grasp of the material or an assertive-enough nature may see the class quickly derailed. They must be able to manage classroom discussions and properly handle unexpected topics.

Second, some discussions may become involved and last longer than anticipated, causing the instructors to fall behind in their teaching plan. Additionally, time constraints of class periods can limit lengthy and in-depth discussions. Instructors still should proceed in a useful direction for the officers.

Third, although most students focus on the main topic, side discussions among some individuals may occur. Such conversations lead LEOs to share experiences with only one or two other individuals, rather than the whole class. If instructors overhear smaller exchanges that relate to the primary subject, they should consider incorporating them into a larger discussion.

Finally, incorporating discussion during a nontheoretical course can prove challenging. LEOs learning a tactic, technique, or skill may have nothing specific to share about the experience because this type of class generally involves a step-by-step, lecture-based approach with minimal discussion outside of a question-and-answer period.

Environment

Instructors must ensure a supportive and encouraging environment, one that values officers’ experiences, perceptions, and beliefs. Students never should feel as though they were “shut down” even inadvertently. Educators should become comfortable with letting the discussion go and develop a trusting environment.

Instructors’ drive and passion for the subject matter and for teaching often highly engage students. At times, difficult topics or unusual situations may arise. Educators should use a diversity of approaches toward discussion and remain flexible for unexpected or even unwelcome comments.

“Instructors’ drive and passion for the subject matter and for teaching often highly engage students.”

Students appreciate educators who show humility and use appropriate humor, such as making fun of themselves. Instructors need to have the right attitude and know how to lighten the mood. However, joking at the wrong time may appear as minimizing the topic of discussion.

To the best extent possible, instructors should try to create the proper environment to facilitate discussions about controversial topics. For instance, the number of officers and layout of the room may encourage whole-class discussion or result in side-group exchanges. Small classes may be stressful to students by making them feel that they must participate continuously.

Often, classroom dialogue stirs emotions of both the instructor and the students. Therefore, educators should accept that such emotions will occur, understand how to handle them, and manage the full spectrum of their own feelings when participants become emotional.

Some conversations can provoke impulsive or even volatile student responses. Instructors should remain positive while redirecting discussion-based learning back on course. Educators should determine the right environment for productive dialogue and evaluate how they can limit factors that stifle discussion.

Setting boundaries can encourage respect and active listening by all officers. For example, instructors should maintain a professional classroom atmosphere, appropriately handle conflicts and differences of opinions, and give all students an equal opportunity to participate. The absence of these key elements can threaten the learning environment and render it detrimental to effective dialogue. Discussion does not necessarily result in agreement, but it should lead to officers recognizing and appreciating perspectives.

Nonverbal Communication

Individuals communicate with not only words but also nonverbal gestures. Instructors often can determine students’ attitudes by observing nonverbals, such as head nods, eye rolling, eye contact or lack of it, and glazed expressions.

Classrooms where officers can see each other are particularly conducive to discussion. To facilitate conversation further, instructors should try to maintain a “poker face” while discussing certain topics so as not to create bias toward their opinion, attitude, or belief. They should maintain eye contact with officers—particularly the one talking—and practice active listening skills, such as nodding and showing interest with facial expressions.

True learning takes place when everyone in the class shares knowledge and considers different perspectives. Some officers will have experienced certain situations even the instructor has not. Classroom discussion often focuses on experiential learning because of the wealth of information LEOs have incurred over their years on the job.

Educators should focus on employing discussion effectively for student engagement, learning, and retention and address any barriers or misunderstandings that may arise. Productive conversations can help grow officers’ abilities to think critically and solve problems based on mutual learning. Offering them opportunities to improve their communication skills through class discussion may prove beneficial not only in the training environment but also in their community.

“To the best extent possible, instructors should try to create the proper environment to facilitate discussions about controversial topics.”

Dr. Lewis can be contacted at [email protected].

1 The author bases this information on her discussions with National Academy students and faculty from 2004 through 2018. 2 Robert F. Vodde, Andragogical Instruction for Effective Police Training (Amherst, NY: Cambridge Press, 2009); Mark R. McCoy, “Teaching Style and the Application of Adult Learning Principles by Police Instructors,” abstract, Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management 29, no. 1 (2006): 77-91, accessed March 18, 2019, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235314391_Teaching_style_and_the_application_of_adult_learning_principles_by_police_instructors; and Eric Paul Werth, Problem-Based Learning in Police Academies: Adult Learning Principles Utilized by Police Trainers (PhD diss., Liberty University, 2009), accessed March 18, 2019, http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1153&context=doctoral. 3 Ruth R. Kennedy, “The Power of In-Class Debates,” Active Learning in Higher Education 10, no. 3 (2009): 225-36, accessed March 18, 2019, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.894.5343&rep=rep1&type=pdf. 4 Stephen D. Brookfield, Developing Critical Thinkers: Challenging Adults to Explore Alternative Ways of Thinking and Acting (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2010).

Leadership Spotlight: Hey, Did You Hear About…?
Leadership Spotlight: Recognizing Nonverbal Indicators of Comfort and Stress
Leadership Spotlight: Successful Leadership Training
Leadership Spotlight: Effective Leadership Through Institutional Integrity
Leadership Spotlight: Leaders Find the Positives
Leadership Spotlight: Walk with Me
Leadership Spotlight: Table Manners from Mom and Dad
Leadership Spotlight: Leadership 101
Safeguard Spotlight: Responding to a Child Predator’s Suicide
Leadership Spotlight: Changing Roles
Leadership Spotlight: Inspirational Leaders Suspend Their Ego
Leadership Spotlight: Leadership Etiquette and Common Sense
Safeguard Spotlight: Coping with Line-of-Duty Exposure to Child Pornography/Exploitation Materials
Leadership Spotlight: Are You an Effective Leader?
Leadership Spotlight: Seasons
Leadership Spotlight: Self-Centered Leadership
Leadership Spotlight: Making Officers' Lives Better
Crimes Against Children Spotlight: Child Abductions - Known Relationships are the Greater Danger
Leadership Spotlight: Leadership Legacies - Reflections on Retiring
Leadership Spotlight: Tuesdays with Terry
Leadership Spotlight: Candor - A Risk You Can Afford to Take
Safeguard Spotlight: Ingesting Poison - Adapting to Exposure to Child Pornography
Leadership Spotlight: Learning from Failure
Crimes Against Children Spotlight: Child Abduction Rapid Deployment (CARD) Team
Leadership Spotlight: Leadership Tunnel Vision
Leadership Spotlight: Learning
Leadership Spotlight: Discovering Inspiration
Crimes Against Children Spotlight: The Neighborhood Canvass and Child Abduction Investigations
Leadership Spotlight: Count Your Blessings
Leadership Spotlight: Be of Consequence
Safeguard Spotlight: Mentoring and Support
Leadership Spotlight: Determined Leadership
Leadership Spotlight: Idle Hands
Leadership Spotlight: Change Can Be a Slippery Slope
Leadership Spotlight: Falling Prey to Posturing
Leadership Spotlight: Different Voices
Leadership Spotlight: The Leader Knows Best?
Leadership Spotlight: Doing the “Right Thing” for the Wrong Reasons: Abuse of Police Discretion
Leadership Spotlight: Humane Leadership
Leadership Spotlight: Impacting Job Satisfaction Through Leadership
Leadership Spotlight: Values-Driven Leadership in Law Enforcement Organizations
Leadership Spotlight: Leadership Lessons from Home
Leadership Spotlight: It’s Your Turn?
Leadership Spotlight: Strategic Leadership During Crisis
Leadership Spotlight: Doing More with Less?
Leadership Spotlight: You Cannot Lead from Behind Your Desk
Leadership Spotlight: Believe in Your Own Leadership
Leadership Spotlight: Build Bridges, Not Dams - Performance Evaluations
Officer Survival Spotlight: Lessons Learned from Critical Encounters
Leadership Spotlight: Emotional Triggers in Decision Making
Officer Survival Spotlight: Wide-Reaching Benefits of Law Enforcement Training
Leadership Spotlight: Valuable Moments
Officer Survival Spotlight: National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial
Leadership Spotlight: Lunchtime Learning Seminars - Benefits and Steps to Get Started
Officer Survival Spotlight: Speed and Seatbelts
Leadership Spotlight: Humility - A Leadership Trait That Gets Results
Officer Survival Spotlight: Officer Perception and Assault Prevention
Leadership Spotlight: The Legacy of a Leader
Officer Survival Spotlight: By the Numbers - Turning LEOKA Data into Training Opportunities
Leadership Spotlight: Things to Remember
Officer Survival Spotlight: Much More Than a Job - Creating a Lasting Tribute
Leadership Spotlight: How Do You Live Your Dash?
Officer Survival Spotlight: Accidental Deaths Among Law Enforcement Officers
Leadership Spotlight: Your Leadership Is Your Life Story (Part 1 of 2)
Officer Survival Spotlight: Arrest Situations - Understanding the Dangers
Leadership Spotlight: Your Leadership Is Your Life Story (Part 2 of 2)
Officer Survival Spotlight: Preventing Assaults - Assessing Offender Perceptions
Leadership Spotlight: Should You Always Lead from the Front?
Officer Survival Spotlight: Circumstances and the Deadly Mix
Leadership Spotlight: Assertiveness
Forensic Spotlight: Toxicology Evidence
Leadership Spotlight: What Skills Can We Learn?
Leadership Spotlight: Fishing for Inspiration
Leadership Spotlight: Foundations of Leadership and Followership
Forensic Spotlight: Paint and Plastic Evidence Analysis in a Drug Possession Case
Leadership Spotlight: All Lives Matter
Crimes Against Children Spotlight: Parental Kidnapping - Using Social Media to Assist in Apprehending Suspects and Recovering Victims
Leadership Spotlight: Overestimating Yourself
Leadership Spotlight: Creating Extraordinary Moments
Forensic Spotlight: Next Generation Identification
Leadership Spotlight: The Black Dot
Forensic Spotlight: Altered Fingerprints - A Challenge to Law Enforcement Identification Efforts
Leadership Spotlight: How Do We Lead from Here?
Forensic Spotlight: A New Investigative Biometric Service - The National Palm Print System
Leadership Spotlight: The Carver and the Planter
Officer Survival Spotlight: Foot Pursuits - Keeping Officers Safe
Leadership Spotlight: Value of Compassion
Leadership Spotlight: I Should Have Eaten More Ice Cream!
Leadership Spotlight: Leading with the Pen - The Handwritten Note
Leadership Spotlight: Leading Through Tragedy
Leadership Spotlight: A System Focus
Officer Wellness Spotlight: Police Chaplains - An Integral Part of Law Enforcement
Leadership Spotlight: Leading At-Risk Employees - Law Enforcement and the Addiction Crisis
Forensic Spotlight: Digital Forensic Examination - A Case Study
Leadership Spotlight: Emulating Lincoln
Leadership Spotlight: Leading By Addressing the Cyber Threat
Community Outreach Spotlight: Friday Night Lights
Leadership Spotlight: The Responsibilities of Command
Officer Survival Spotlight: The 4,000-Pound Bullet
Leadership Spotlight: Importance of the Little Things
Community Outreach Spotlight: P.L.A.Y. Program
Leadership Spotlight: Helium vs. Helicopter
Community Outreach Spotlight: Cops and Clergy Breakfast
Leadership Spotlight: Information Output vs. Effective Communication
Officer Survival Spotlight: What Is a Safe Distance?
Leadership Spotlight: President Jefferson and Criticism
Community Outreach Spotlight: Camp Cadet of Cambria County
Leadership Spotlight: Leadership Lessons from Mom
Leadership Spotlight: Where is Your Bottom Line?
Leadership Spotlight: Single Point of Failure
Leadership Spotlight: Communicating with Millennials - Using Brevity
Community Outreach Spotlight: Redefining School Resource Officers’ Roles
Leadership Spotlight: Are You An Approachable Leader?
Leadership Spotlight: Credibility
Leadership Spotlight: Compassion in Law Enforcement
Leadership Spotlight: Congratulations, Graduate! You Have 90 Percent More Learning to Do!
Leadership Spotlight: President John Quincy Adams and Bounded Ethicality
Leadership Spotlight: Leadership During Change
Leadership Spotlight: Intent vs. Impact - Communicating Effectively
Leadership Spotlight: Having Hard Conversations
Leadership Spotlight: Remember to Focus on What Really Matters
Crime Prevention Spotlight: Combating Thefts from Automobiles
Leadership Spotlight: Lessons from the Living Room
Leadership Spotlight: Why Leaders Lose Good People
Community Outreach Spotlight: Run with the Police
Leadership Spotlight: Have We Lost Civility?
Leadership Spotlight: A Look in the Mirror
Leadership Spotlight: Importance of Listening Skills
Leadership Spotlight: Setting the Example
Community Outreach Spotlight: Rape Aggression Defense Class
Leadership Spotlight: Rapport and Empathy
Leadership Spotlight: Spiritual Wellness in Law Enforcement
Leadership Spotlight: Development Is a Question Away
Leadership Spotlight: Lessons on Conflict
Leadership Spotlight: Choose to Take Action
Community Outreach Spotlight: Team G.R.E.A.T.
Leadership Spotlight: A Return to Civility
Leadership Spotlight: Indispensable Guidance
Leadership Spotlight: Confidence in the Face of Challenges
Leadership Spotlight: Engaging Millennials in the Workplace
Leadership Spotlight: Courage to Do Less
Leadership Spotlight: Importance of Cybersecurity
Community Outreach Spotlight: Jamming Hoopsfest
Leadership Spotlight: Stuck in Autopilot?
Leadership Spotlight: How Effective Leaders Make Us Feel
Leadership Spotlight: Distant Crisis, Local Leverage
Technology Spotlight: Crime Data Explorer
Leadership Spotlight: Leading by Learning
Leadership Spotlight: Benefiting from Diverse Viewpoints
Leadership Spotlight: One Bite at a Time
Community Outreach Spotlight: Clippers and Cops
Leadership Spotlight: Recognizing Your Organization’s Culture
Leadership Spotlight: Improving Effectiveness with Trusted Advisors
Leadership Spotlight: Courage Can Be Found in the Strangest Places
Community Outreach Spotlight: Partnering to Make Purposeful Art
Leadership Spotlight: Leading Through Delegation
Community Outreach Spotlight: Safeguarding Senior Communities
Leadership Spotlight: Redefining Leadership Presence
Leadership Spotlight: Leading Through Others’ Success
Social Media Spotlight: Communication as a Tool to Fight Violent Crime
Leadership Spotlight: Lessons Learned
Leadership Spotlight: Mistakes and Forgiveness
Leadership Spotlight: Delivering Bad News to Employees
Leadership Spotlight: Appreciating Others’ Burdens
Community Outreach Spotlight: Connecting Kids and Police Through Video Games
Leadership Spotlight: Preparation for Crisis
Leadership Spotlight: Embrace this Moment
Leadership Spotlight: Finding Purpose
Community Outreach Spotlight: Pedal Power
Leadership Spotlight: Prompting Reflection
Leadership Spotlight: Seizing the Opportunity for Meaningful Change
Positive Policing Spotlight: Applying the Concept
Leadership Spotlight: When to Let Go and When to Seek Input
Leadership Spotlight: Addressing Adaptive Challenges
Community Outreach Spotlight: Bridging the Gap Through Boxing
Leadership Spotlight: Create Your Own Outline
Officer Wellness Spotlight: The Law Enforcement Family
Leadership Spotlight: Facing the Pandemic
Leadership Spotlight: Institutional Knowledge—Recognizing, Valuing, and Preserving It
Community Outreach Spotlight: Caught Doing Something Right
Leadership Spotlight: What Works for You?
Leadership Spotlight: Feedback and Emotional Intelligence
Social Media Spotlight: A Small Act of Kindness Makes a Global Impact
Community Outreach Spotlight: Gaming with a Cop
Forensic Spotlight: Innovative Latent Print Processing
Leadership Spotlight: The Will to Lead
Officer Wellness Spotlight: Benefits of Mindfulness
Leadership Spotlight: Importance of Suicide Awareness
Leadership Spotlight: Tribal Supervision
Community Outreach Spotlight: Lunch and Learn
Leadership Spotlight: Drawing Your Own Conclusions
Community Outreach Spotlight: Fresno Fight Girls
Leadership Spotlight: Patience in Development
Forensic Spotlight: Dowsing for Human Remains — Considerations for Investigators
Leadership Spotlight: Are You the Single Point of Failure?
Community Outreach Spotlight: “COPTOBER” Community Fair
Community Outreach Spotlight: Building Bridges
Leadership Spotlight: Is Happiness Overrated?
Leadership Spotlight: A Calm, Focused Mind
Community Outreach Spotlight: FBI Explorers
Officer Wellness Spotlight: Prevention and Early Detection of Heart Disease
Leadership Spotlight: The Connected Leader
Community Outreach Spotlight: National Faith and Blue Weekend
Leadership Spotlight: Teachable Moments
Community Outreach Spotlight: Shop Talk
Crime Prevention Spotlight: Solving Homicides with Trading Cards
Leadership Spotlight: Effectively Managing Personnel
Community Outreach Spotlight: New Bern Noble Knights
Leadership Spotlight: Addressing Disengagement
Community Outreach Spotlight: Cooking with Cops
Leadership Spotlight: Effective Time-Outs During Crises
Community Outreach Spotlight: Halo
Leadership Spotlight: Creating Purpose-Driven Teams
Leadership Spotlight: Women in Law Enforcement Today
Community Outreach Spotlight: Books for Kids
Leadership Spotlight: Showing You Care
Community Outreach Spotlight: Tweet-Alongs
Leadership Spotlight: Public Safety Partnerships
Leadership Spotlight: Improving the Promotional Process
Leadership Spotlight: Leading Through a Crisis
Leadership Spotlight: Theoretical Leadership Training
Community Outreach Spotlight: Reaching At-Risk Youths
Leadership Spotlight: Time for a Title Change
Community Outreach Spotlight: Weekly Outreach Walks
Community Outreach Spotlight: Mounted Patrol Units
Leadership Spotlight: Rethinking Law Enforcement Leadership Culture
Social Media Spotlight: A Tool for Relationship Building
Bulletin Notes
Bulletin Honors
Notable Speeches
Bulletin Reports
Unusual Weapons
Additional Highlights
Crime Data: Bipartisan Safer Communities Act
Tulsa, Oklahoma, Police Department
Russellville, Arkansas, Police Department
Granite County, Montana, Sheriff’s Office
Exeter, New Hampshire, Police Department
Louisiana Office of Alcohol and Tobacco Control
Wayland, Massachusetts, Police Department
Cape Elizabeth, Maine, Police Department
Cortland, New York, Police Department
Fayetteville, West Virginia, Police Department
Fredericksburg, Virginia, Police Department
Reading, Ohio, Police Department
Pocatello, Idaho, Police Department
Yankton, South Dakota, Police Department
Merriam, Kansas, Police Department
University of Delaware Police Department
Bradenton, Florida, Police Department
Ridgetop, Tennessee, Police Department
Jefferson County, Washington, Sheriff’s Office
Paducah, Kentucky, Police Department
Berlin, Wisconsin, Police Department
Payson, Arizona, Police Department
Toccoa, Georgia, Police Department
Starkville, Mississippi, Police Department
Mineral County, Nevada, Sheriff’s Office
Estes Park, Colorado, Police Department
Dixon, Illinois, Police Department
Oxford, Pennsylvania, Police Department
Coos Bay, Oregon, Police Department
Jefferson Township, New Jersey, Police Department
San Francisco, California, Police Department
Lacy Lakeview, Texas, Police Department
Missouri State Highway Patrol
Clinton, Connecticut, Police Department
Hoonah, Alaska, Police Department
Aberdeen, Maryland, Police Department
Edina, Minnesota, Police Department
Talladega, Alabama, Police Department
Santa Fe, New Mexico, Police Department
Lake City, South Carolina, Police Department
Gladwin, Michigan, Police Department
Cary, North Carolina, Police Department
Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation
Hope, Arkansas, Police Department
Montana Highway Patrol
Franklin, New Hampshire, Police Department
Shreveport, Louisiana, Police Department
Ossining, New York, Police Department
County of Plymouth, Massachusetts, Sheriff’s Department
Hallowell, Maine, Police Department
Lynchburg, Virginia, Police Department
University of Nevada, Reno, Police Department
New Glasgow, Nova Scotia, Police Department
Gooding, Idaho, Police Department
Middleburg Heights, Ohio, Police Department
North Miami Beach, Florida, Police Department
Osage City, Kansas, Police Department
San Juan County, Washington, Sheriff’s Office
Tennessee Bureau of Investigation
Merrill, Wisconsin, Police Department
Cave City, Kentucky, Police Department
Desert Hawk Fugitive Task Force
Colorado State University Police Department
Elberton, Georgia, Police Department
Media, Pennsylvania, Police Department
Bartonville, Illinois, Police Department
Astoria, Oregon, Police Department
Closter, New Jersey, Police Department
Coalinga, California, Police Department
Port Aransas, Texas, Police Department
Manchester, Connecticut, Police Department
Anson County, North Carolina, Sheriff’s Office
Port Huron, Michigan, Police Department
Havre, Montana, Police Department
Sanbornton, New Hampshire, Police Department
Schenectady, New York, Police Department
Fitchburg, Massachusetts, Police Department
Fairfield, Maine, Police Department
Martinsville, Virginia, Police Department
Miamisburg, Ohio, Police Department
Mount Hope, West Virginia, Police Department
Metro Transit Police Department, Washington, D.C.
Lindsborg, Kansas, Police Department
Wenatchee, Washington, Police Department
Kenneth City, Florida, Police Department
Campbell County, Kentucky, Police Department
Flagstaff, Arizona, Police Department
Moultrie, Georgia, Police Department
Jefferson County, Colorado, Sheriff's Office
Columbia County, Oregon, Sheriff's Department
Lower Gwynedd Township, Pennsylvania, Police Department
Clovis, California, Police Department
Coal Valley, Illinois, Police Department
New Providence, New Jersey, Police Department
El Paso County, Texas, Sheriff’s Department
Easton, Connecticut, Police Department
Dorchester County, Maryland, Sheriff’s Office
Wetumpka, Alabama, Police Department
Anoka County, Minnesota, Sheriff’s Office
Wake Forest, North Carolina, Police Department
Evart, Michigan, Police Department
Vienna, Virginia, Police Department
Gorham, Maine, Police Department
Georgetown, Massachusetts, Police Department
Stony Point, New York, Police Department
Sunapee, New Hampshire, Police Department
Virginia Division of Capitol Police, Richmond, Virginia
German Township (Montgomery County), Ohio, Police Department
Longboat Key, Florida, Police Department
Franklin, Kentucky, Police Department
Cle Elum-Roslyn-South Cle Elum, Washington, Police Department
Navajo County, Arizona, Sheriff’s Office
Powder Springs, Georgia, Police Department
Lower Salford Township, Pennsylvania, Police Department
Vail, Colorado, Police Department
Oregon Department of Public Safety Standards and Training
Bethalto, Illinois, Police Department
Kingsburg, California, Police Department
Franklin Lakes, New Jersey, Police Department
Fairfield, Connecticut, Police Department
Tomball, Texas, Police Department
Clearwater County, Minnesota, Sheriff’s Office
Baltimore County, Maryland, Sheriff’s Office
Richmond, Michigan, Police Department
Mobile, Alabama, Police Department
Bradford, New Hampshire, Police Department
Hickory, North Carolina, Police Department
Westwego, Louisiana, Police Department
Somerville, Massachusetts, Police Department
New College of Florida and University of South Florida Sarasota-Manatee Campus Police
Southold, New York, Police Department
Norfolk, Virginia, Police Department
Sanford, Maine, Police Department
Blue Ash, Ohio, Police Department
Washington State Patrol
Florence, Kentucky, Police Department
Atlanta, Georgia, Police Department
Central Arizona Project Protective Services Department
Summit County, Colorado, Sheriff's Department
Springfield Township (Montgomery County), Pennsylvania, Police Department
Monterey, California, Police Department
Philomath, Oregon, Police Department
Georgetown University Police Department
Wise County, Texas, Sheriff's Office
Oradell, New Jersey, Police Department
Woodbury, Connecticut, Police Department
Columbia Heights, Minnesota, Police Department
Hoover, Alabama, Police Department
Macomb County, Michigan, Sheriff's Office
Bel Air, Maryland, Police Department
Louisiana State Police
Asheboro, North Carolina, Police Department
Truro, Massachusetts, Police Department
Watertown, New York, Police Department
South Portland, Maine, Police Department
Henrico County, Virginia, Sheriff's Office
South Euclid, Ohio, Police Department
Ephrata, Washington, Police Department
Apache Junction, Arizona, Police Department
Bowling Green, Kentucky, Police Department
Georgia Bureau of Investigation
Gunnison, Colorado, Police Department
Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania, Police Department
Clackamas County, Oregon, Sheriff's Office
National City, California, Police Department
Sugar Grove, Illinois, Police Department
Lacey Township, New Jersey, Police Department
Trinity University Police Department
Hennepin County, Minnesota, Sheriff’s Office
Middletown, Connecticut, Police Department
Cottonwood, Alabama, Department of Public Safety
Bangor, Michigan, Police Department
Edenton, North Carolina, Police Department
Wakefield, Massachusetts, Police Department
Yates County, New York, Sheriff’s Office
Piscataquis County, Maine, Sheriff’s Office
Danville, Virginia, Police Department
North Olmsted, Ohio, Police Department
Fernandina Beach, Florida, Police Department
Herington, Kansas, Police Department
Grandview, Washington, Police Department
Boone County, Kentucky, Sheriff’s Office
Scottsdale, Arizona, Police Department
St. Marys, Georgia, Police Department
Florence, Oregon, Police Department
Hermitage, Pennsylvania, Police Department
Yuba City, California, Police Department
Quincy, Illinois, Police Department
Houston, Texas, Memorial Villages Police Department
Woodbridge, Connecticut, Police Department
Frostburg, Maryland, Police Department
Bordentown Township, New Jersey, Police Department
Chowan County, North Carolina, Sheriff’s Office
Owatonna, Minnesota, Police Department
Las Vegas, Nevada, Metropolitan Police Department
FBI Las Vegas, Nevada, Division
Carroll, New Hampshire, Police Department
Boxford, Massachusetts, Police Department
Corunna, Michigan, Police Department
Marshall County, Kentucky, Sheriff’s Department
Canastota, New York, Police Department
Fort Scott, Kansas, Police Department
Hudson, Michigan, Police Department
Elmira Heights, New York, Police Department
Orono, Maine, Police Department
Lexington, Virginia, Police Department
North Providence, Rhode Island, Police Department
Galax, Virginia, Police Department
Madison, Florida, Police Department
Urbana, Ohio, Police Division
Enumclaw, Washington, Police Department
Oakdale Borough, Pennsylvania, Police Department
LaSalle County, Illinois, Sheriff's Department
Oroville, California, Police Department
University of Connecticut Police Department
Robinson, Texas, Police Department
Minnetrista, Minnesota, Police Department
Manchester-by-the Sea, Massachusetts, Police Department
Durham, North Carolina, Police Department
Carthage, New York, Police Department
Providence, Rhode Island, Police Department
Wise, Virginia, Police Department
Florence, Kansas, Police Department
Walton Hills, Ohio, Police Department
Flagler Beach, Florida, Police Department
Upper Southampton Township, Pennsylvania, Police Department
Lompoc, California, Police Department
Joshua, Texas, Police Department
Smithville, Missouri, Police Department
Ohio State University Police
Moraine Valley Community College Police Department
Gasconade County, Missouri, Sheriff's Department
Town of New Windsor, New York, Police Department
Powell, Wyoming, Police Department
Scotts Bluff County, Nebraska, Sheriff’s Office
Cornwall Borough, Pennsylvania, Police Department
Albuquerque, New Mexico, Public Schools Police Department
Tasmania, Australia, Police
Rossville, Tennessee, Police Department
United States Park Police
Fayette County, Georgia, Marshal's Office
Prince William County, Virginia, Police Department
New Glarus, Wisconsin, Police Department
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, Police Department
Ontario, Canada, Provincial Police
Emporia, Kansas, Police Department
Ambridge, Pennsylvania, Police Department
Santa Barbara, California, Police Department
Hamilton, Ohio, Police Department
Jefferson County, Missouri, Sheriff’s Department
Northfield, Minnesota, Police Department
Manalapan Township, New Jersey, Police Department
Mars, Pennsylvania, Police Department
Sussex, England, Police
Claremore, Oklahoma, Police Department
National Park Service
Mount Morris, New York, Police Department
Shrewsbury, New Jersey, Police Department
Department of the Army Police
North Syracuse, New York, Police Department
Glen Cove, New York, Police Department
Little Egg Harbor, New Jersey, Police Department
Quogue Village, New York, Police Department
Glencoe, Illinois, Department of Public Safety
Morgan Hill, California, Police Department
James City County, Virginia, Police Department
Southern Pines, North Carolina, Police Department
Camillus, New York, Police Department
Stratford, Connecticut, Police Department
Ector County, Texas, Independent School District Police Department
Palm Beach, Florida, Police Department
Penn Hills, Pennsylvania, Police Department
Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife
Becker, Minnesota, Police Department
Burnsville, Minnesota, Police Department
Pacific, Missouri, Police Department
Chilmark, Massachusetts, Police Department
St. Johns County, Florida, Sheriff’s Office
Orange, Connecticut, Police Department
Huron, California, Police Department
Harrison, New Jersey, Police Department
Patton Township, Pennsylvania, Police Department
Meadows Place, Texas, Police Department
Corona, California, Police Department
Bay View, Ohio, Police Department
Kansas City, Missouri, Police Department
Orange, Massachusetts, Police Department
Onondaga County, New York, Sheriff’s Office
Metro Special Police Department, Washington, D.C.
Norwood, Ohio, Police Division
Los Altos, California, Police Department
Patch Call: Pennsylvania State Police
Beaver Dam, Wisconsin, Police Department
New Taipei City, Taiwan, Police Department
Cyprus Police
Rochester, Illinois, Police Department
Hewitt, Texas, Police Department
Alfred, New York, Police Department
Radford City, Virginia, Police Department
River Vale, New Jersey, Police Department
Port St. Lucie, Florida, Police Department
Campbell, California, Police Department
Monroe, New York, Police Department
Northern York County, Pennsylvania, Regional Police Department
Lancaster City, Pennsylvania, Bureau of Police
Gates Mills, Ohio, Police Department
Franklin, Tennessee, Police Department
Salinas, California, Police Department
Butler, New Jersey, Police Department
Fairport, New York, Police Department
New York City Police Department
Brighton, New York, Police Department
Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, Sheriff’s Office
California Department of Corrections
Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Police Department
Cornell University Police Department, Ithaca, New York
Monmouth University Police Department, West Long Branch, New Jersey
North College Hill, Ohio, Police Department
Penn Township, Pennsylvania, Police Department
Northlake, Illinois, Police Department
Davis, California, Police Department
Potsdam, New York, Police Department
Palomar College Police Department, San Marcos, California
Somerset County, New Jersey, Police Academy
Covina, California, Police Department
Tuscaloosa, Alabama, Police Department
Walla Walla County, Washington, Sheriff’s Office
Portland, Oregon, Police Bureau
Shawnee, Kansas, Police Department
Rome, Georgia, Police Department
Mongolian Police
Minnetonka, Minnesota, Police Department
Wall Township, New Jersey, Police Department
Long Beach, California, Police Department
Menands, New York, Police Department
Schertz, Texas, Police Department
Norwalk, Connecticut, Police Department
Rapid City, South Dakota, Police Department
Branford, Connecticut, Police Department
Banning, California, Police Department
Peabody, Massachusetts, Police Department
Concord, North Carolina, Police Department
U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations
East Greenwich Township, New Jersey, Police Department
Wilmington, Delaware, Police Department
Brazilian Federal Police
Texas Highway Patrol
Missing Person: Amber Lynn Wilde - Green Bay, Wisconsin
Missing Person: Joan M. Rebar - Meriden, Kansas
Unidentified Person: John Doe - Apache Junction, Arizona
Missing Person: Helen Irene Tucker - Tacoma, Washington
Missing Person: Debra Kay King - Tacoma, Washington
Missing Person: Simone Ridinger - Sherborn, Massachusetts
Homicide Victim: Santana Acosta - Phoenix, Arizona
Unidentified Person: John Doe - Arcadia, Florida
Missing Person: Richard Luther Ingram - Fort Lewis, Washington
Missing Person: Kelsie Jean Schelling - Pueblo, Colorado
Missing Person: Jennifer L. Wilson - Derby Kansas
Unidentified Person: Jane Doe - Marion County, Missouri
Unidentified Person: John Doe - Grant County, Kentucky
Unidentified Person: Jane Doe - Naples, Florida
Unidentified Person: Jane Doe - Pike National Forest, Colorado
Missing Person: William Gary Morris - Nashville, Tennessee
Unidentified Person: Jane Doe - Cameron Parish, Louisiana
Unidentified Person: John Doe - Needville, Texas
Unidentified Person: Jane Doe - Glennie, Michigan
Unidentified Person: John Doe - Wickenburg, Arizona
Sexual Assault: Flagstaff, Arizona
Missing Person: David Emerson, Jr. - Snyder, Texas
Missing Person: Gregory Keith Mann, Jr. - Wichita Falls, Texas
Active Shooter
Officer Safety and Wellness
Police-Community Relations
Suicide Prevention
Human Trafficking
Leadership and Ethics
Officer-Involved Shootings
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - January 2010
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - February 2010
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - March 2010
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - April 2010
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - May 2010
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - June 2010
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - July 2010
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - August 2010
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - September 2010
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - October 2010
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - November 2010
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - December 2010
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - January 2011
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - February 2011
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - March 2011
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - April 2011
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - May 2011
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - June 2011
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - July 2011
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - August 2011
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - September 2011
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - October 2011
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - November 2011
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - December 2011
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - January 2012
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - February 2012
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - March 2012
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - April 2012
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - May 2012
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - June 2012
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - July 2012
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - August 2012
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - September 2012
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - October 2012
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - November 2012
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - December 2012
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - January 2013
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - February 2013
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - March 2013
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - April 2013
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - May 2013
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - June 2013
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - July 2013
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - August 2013
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - September 2013
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - October/November 2013
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - December 2013
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - January 2014
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - February 2014
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - March 2014
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - April 2014
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - May 2014
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - June 2014
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - July 2014
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - August 2014
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - September 2014
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - October 2014
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - November 2014
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - December 2014
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - January 2015
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - February 2015
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - March 2015
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - April 2015
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - May 2015
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - June 2015
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - July 2015
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - August 2015
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - September 2015
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - October 2015
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - November 2015
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - December 2015
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - January 2016
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - February 2016
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - March 2016
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - April 2016
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - May 2016
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - June 2016
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - July 2016
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - August 2016
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - September 2016
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - October 2016
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - November 2016
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - December 2016
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - January 2017
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - February 2017
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - March 2017
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - April 2017
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - May 2017
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - June 2017
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - July 2017
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - August 2017
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - September 2017
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - October 2017
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - November 2017
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - December 2017
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - January 2018
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - February 2018
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - March 2018
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - April 2018
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - May 2018
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - June 2018
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - July 2018
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - August 2018
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - September 2018
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - October 2018
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - November 2018
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - December 2018
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - February 2019
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - March 2019
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - April 2019
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - May 2019
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - June 2019
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - July 2019
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - August 2019
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - September 2019
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - October 2019
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - November 2019
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - December 2019
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - January 2020
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - February 2020
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - March 2020
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - April 2020
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - May 2020
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - June 2020
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - July 2020
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - August 2020
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - September 2020
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - October 2020
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - November 2020
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - December 2020
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - January 2021
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - February 2021
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - March 2021
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - April 2021
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - May 2021
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - June 2021
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - July 2021
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - August 2021
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - September 2021
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - October 2021
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - November 2021
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - December 2021
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - January 2022
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - February 2022
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - March 2022
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - April 2022
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - May 2022
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - June 2022
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - July 2022
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - August 2022
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - September 2022
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - October 2022
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - November 2022
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - December 2022
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - January 2023
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - February 2023
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - March 2023
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - April 2023
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - May 2023
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - June 2023
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - July 2023
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - August 2023
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - September 2023
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - October 2023
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - November 2023
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - December 2023
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - January 2024
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - February 2024
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - March 2024
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - April 2024
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - May 2024
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - June 2024
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - July 2024
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin - August 2024
Get LEB Updates

New HKS research asks communities what reimagining public safety means to them

In neighborhoods experiencing discrimination from law enforcement, police are viewed both as part of the problem and the solution.

Is it possible for marginalized communities to work together to create thriving neighborhoods? Is there a role for police officers, who are often mistrusted, in this effort?

This was the subject of the latest research from Harvard Kennedy School’s Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management (PCJ), led by faculty director Sandra Susan Smith.

Smith, the Daniel and Florence Guggenheim Professor of Criminal Justice and the Carol K. Pforzheimer Professor at the Radcliffe Institute, formed the Roundtable on Racial Disparities in Massachusetts Criminal Courts at the PCJ in 2021. Its goal is to influence future policies, practices, and procedures to eradicate the sources of racial inequity and racial disparity in Massachusetts’s courts.

The Roundtable, under the direction of Smith, has studied issues such as jury exclusion and reducing racial disparities through decriminalization. The latest study, This is What Thriving Communities Look Like , looked at four neighborhoods in the greater Boston area to better define what is meant by “reimagining public safety.”

Smith, with Amisha Kambath, a research assistant at the PCJ who is beginning Yale Law School this fall, and Noor Toraif, an assistant professor at UPenn, wanted to understand what it meant for people to feel and be safe in their neighborhoods. Working with focus groups in Roxbury, Dorchester, East Boston and South Boston—communities that have different racial and class compositions but share a troubled relationship with law enforcement—the team gained insights on what residents need to thrive and what role policing can play.

“Ever since the murder of George Floyd in 2020 and the conviction of the Minneapolis police officer who killed him, we have heard this plea to reimagine public safety,” the authors wrote. “In working with the residents of these Boston neighborhoods, we hoped to understand what a safe, thriving community looked like to them. And how law enforcement fits into that picture.”

As Smith revealed in a recent PCJ report the residents of these Boston communities report higher rates of police harassment and as a result feel a deep distrust of law enforcement.

“We also knew that creating a thriving community required deliberate and sustained engagements with residents themselves, with a particular emphasis on those most often targeted for aggressive and harmful police interventions but least considered when questions about how to achieve public safety arise,” the researchers wrote.

“What comes through powerfully from these focus group meetings is the level of sophistication that residents have in identifying the very real structural barriers to thriving their communities face ...”

Sandra susan smith.

After a series of focus group sessions, which included participants from each of the four communities, people with diverse experiences and relationships to the state, including a range of age groups as well as formerly incarcerated residents, Kambath, Toraif, and Smith identified three themes:

What thriving communities look like
What communities need to thrive
What role police could play in creating and maintaining safe, healthy, and thriving communities.

What is “thriving”?

Inherent in thriving communities, Smith’s team found, was a sense of community cohesion and freedom from harm: as one young adult respondent put it, “everyone kind of having each other’s back.”

The research team noted one striking response when talking about a sense of community.

“Rather than look to more affluent neighborhoods as examples of community cohesion,” the researchers wrote, “these residents most often looked back in time at their own neighborhoods where they were born and raised.”

Respondents pointed out how neighbors would sit on their porches to watch the street, cleaned the areas of trash, and actively engaged with one another in public spaces—all positive signs of a thriving community.

Other respondents noted that local events can enhance a sense of belonging. A formerly incarcerated resident described the East Boston farmer’s market, saying “Every Wednesday they pass out fresh vegetables to the public. It’s a thriving place. It’s a place to bring people together.”

The study indicated that the prevailing threat to safety was easy access to guns, a fear supported by Boston police statistics for the communities. None of the respondents could envision thriving without freedom from violence.

“Violence, experienced directly or indirectly and with or without guns, impacts the physical and mental health of residents,” said Smith. “It also erodes resident’s ability and willingness to engage in ways that contribute positively to their communities.”

What communities need

The focus group discussions led to the research team identifying three themes for creating a thriving community: a healthy built environment, greater investments in capital development, and access to high quality physical and mental healthcare.

“Our participating residents focused on specific aspects of the built environment,” wrote Kambath, Toraif, and Smith, pointing to greater access to green spaces, parks and recreation. Many spoke of the need for more trees. The team identified prior research that noted the benefits of green space to help reduce violent crime and found that tree canopy coverage—areas shaded by trees—were especially low in two of the focus group communities.

Neighborhood gentrification—where poorer, urban communities are revitalized by wealthier citizens, often displacing the current residents—was also systemic in these areas, contributing to housing instability for longtime residents. In fact, Boston ranks third among highly gentrified cities in the country, with the four neighborhoods in this study at risk, according to a 2020 study by the National Community Reinvestment Coalition.

Investment in human capital was also top of mind, not only enhanced, free education for the area’s youth, but skill-building opportunities for adults as well. And as one resident argued, there was a sense that jobs and contracts in these neighborhoods should go to community members first.

Residents in all four neighborhoods identified a need for far more resources to address health concerns, especially mental health and substance abuse issues, but feared that more affluent communities with far less need for public support would be privileged in the city’s decision-making.

What can policing do

“When imagining safe and thriving communities,” Kambath, Toraif, and Smith noted, “Residents offered a wide range of views about the role police can play.” Many saw “police as protectors” equating public safety with police.

Others identified the police as flawed, unresponsive, and failing to treat residents with respect. Nevertheless, the research found residents wanted police to be protective and believed that through training they could become better public servants. As one East Boston resident said, “We need more police officers” to provide a sense of security.

And then some respondents viewed police as “violence workers.” “They terrorize our young people” is how one formerly incarcerated Roxbury-Dorchester resident put it.

"In a related report that the PCJ released in June based on analysis of a representative sample of Boston residents,” Smith wrote, “Our analysis of this Boston survey not only revealed that police harassment is predictive of distrust and eroded feelings of community safety, but police harassment is also predictive of symptoms of trauma and associated with chronic health issues.”

“These findings, which are consistent with prior research in this area, suggest that police harassment might be a direct and indirect contributor in making communities unsafe, thwarting residents’ efforts to thrive,” she continued.

The study, while sobering on many fronts, also offered opportunities for collaboration in these communities. And residents felt they had taken the first important steps, being heard, voicing concerns, and participating in solutions.

"What comes through powerfully from these focus group meetings is the level of sophistication that residents have in identifying the very real structural barriers to thriving their communities face and offering concrete, workable solutions to overcome these,” said Smith. Responses from residents even included photographs of what a thriving community meant to them.

“They are the experts that we should be listening to. In this way, they are no different than generations of residents who have come before them. It is well past time that we take their ideas seriously."

Banner photograph by Carlin Stiehl/The Boston Globe/Getty Images; inline photograph by Matthew J. Lee/The Boston Globe/Getty Images; portrait by Martha Stewart

Focus group participants submitted photographs that describe a thriving community. The second banner photo is from an East Boston young adult: “I just think it is cool, people can sit down with their friends, or just sit down.”

More from HKS

Three years after police reforms, black bostonians report harassment and lack of trust at higher rates than other groups, want a jury to be fair, impartial, and engaged in higher-quality deliberations diversify the jury pool, harvard researchers say., sandra susan smith aims to eradicate disparities in criminal courts.

Get smart & reliable public policy insights right in your inbox.

COMMENTS

Perspective: Need for Critical Thinking in Police Training
The article argues that critical thinking is vital to the safety and effectiveness of law enforcement officers in various situations. It discusses the challenges and benefits of incorporating critical thinking into police training programs and cultures, and cites examples from the private sector and the military.
Real-life examples of critical thinking on police calls
5. It's a busy night and all officers are on calls. You're dispatched to an apartment building about a man with a gun. Upon arrival, the victim says a resident of the apartment building appeared intoxicated, was screaming in the pool area and was carrying a rifle. The victim told the suspect to be quiet and go inside.
How police officers can learn to think and write critically
Skillful writing teaches them how to form good arguments and think critically about investigations and evidence. Focusing on critical thinking and writing will enable officers to form good arguments and it will make them better, more well-rounded and effective officers. Reference: 1. Jackson M. Catching our eye: The alluring fallacy of knowing ...
How critical thinking improves police decision-making
Critical thinking is the process of engaging your brain to comprehend, assess, analyze and process information in such a way as to improve the quality of your actions, decisions and communications. It usually requires us to interrupt our automatic decision-making processes, challenge our assumptions and look at scenarios with fresh perspectives ...
Critical Thinking and Writing Skills: Essential for Officers
To perform their jobs effectively in these situations requires top-notch critical thinking and writing skills, which are rarely focused on enough as part of law enforcement training. Officers who are intelligent, able to think clearly under pressure, and compassionate are going to be more effective because they are better able to make good ...
Critical Thinking: A Core Task of Public Safety Employees
A.R.R. Critical thinking skills enable law enforcement personnel to analyze information and process it wisely in order to help determine the value of that information and make a decision. There are too many documented instances of a suspect telling an officer, "I can't breathe," only to hear the officer say, "If you're talking, you ...
(PDF) Decision-Making Skills That Encompass a Critical Thinking
Critical thinking skills can prove to be necessary for law enforcement professionals in acquiring new ways of thinking more proficiently and becoming more proactive in combating traditional ...
PDF ICAT Module #2: Critical Decision-Making Model
Module Goal: Through classroom instruction and discussion, introduce and explain the. Critical Decision-Making Model (CDM) for use by patrol officers in managing critical. cts who not armed with firearms and who may b. experiencing a mental health or other crisis. Required Materials: Digital presentation (Power Point, videos); lesson plan.
Decision-Making Skills That Encompass a Critical Thinking Orientation
This article discusses the challenges of engaging in critical thinking skills for law enforcement professionals and the importance of making sound decisions in the wake of new emerging threats that stem from domestic to international crime. Critical thinking skills are inevitably becoming a new business function for all types of organisations.
Critical Thinking Training for Law Enforcement Recruits and Officers
5. Learn the criteria by which they should make judgments in all police encounters and situations. This includes objectivity, impartiality, and fairness. 6. Learn the barriers to critical thinking all police officers face, as do all humans - namely, egocentric and sociocentric thinking. 7. Learn to think through implications and consequences ...
(PDF) Decision-making skills that encompass a critical thinking
As a final thought, critical thinking skills in law enforcement and public safety should involve thinking of different scenarios and weighing probable solutions for every situation. Whether the probability of occurrence is low or high, these situations are still possible and deserve detailed discussions and countermeasure planning. ...
PDF Decision-Making Skills That Encompass a Critical Thinking Orientation
Critical thinking skills for law enforcement professionals Page 142. enforcement professionals should embrace this idea as a critical thinking stratagem. New skills are required of the law enforce-
Social and Emotional Intelligence in Public Safety
I started working in law enforcement during the late 1980s. At that time, the agencies I worked for were located in busy jurisdictions where we ran from one call to the next. ... Phillips W and Burrell D. (2008) Decision-making skills that encompass a critical thinking orientation for law enforcement professionals. International Journal of ...
Decisionmaking Skills That Encompass a Critical Thinking Orientation
Also, critical thinking skills in law enforcement and public safety should involve thinking of different scenarios and weighing probable solutions for every situation. Critical thinking skills are inevitably becoming a new business function for all types of organizations. Traditional management methodologies of some law enforcement agencies may ...
Abilene Christian University Digital Commons @ ACU
education. Critical thinking is a needed skill identified by high-stress professions such as the military, nursing, and disaster management, yet there is limited study regarding critical thinking in law enforcement. The purpose of this research study was to assess the efficacy of law
Critical Thinking in Law Enforcement Training Academies: A
Recently, law enforcement officer use of force incidents resulting in death has seemingly become more prevalent. Generally, the educational requirement for a law enforcement officer is a high school diploma or general education development degree. One must question if this requirement is sufficient for a law enforcement officer to be successful in a modern world as the law enforcement training ...
Tactical decision making: An equation for critical thinking ...
Risk vs. Need ÷ Time + Resources Available = Decision *. This equation is simple to look at. Its effects are profound in application. As you start to use it, you will find that it fits every situation you will come across and will give you a more concise way of evaluating situations in the field.
2019
This training is based upon, and consistent with: MCJA 2019 Mandatory Lesson Plan: Critical Thinking in Law Enforcement Instructional Goal It is vitally important for law enforcement officers to be objective when dealing with any given situation. By thinking critically about the facts before them, officers can avoid making errors in judgement about the situation. Utilizing […]
Critical Thinking Issues in Policing
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 73(11), 18-24. The authors explore pedagogy and andragogy applied to police training - mainly community-oriented police training. They argue that an integrated model is preferable, given officers must learn mechanical and critical thinking skills.
Focus on Ethics: Rethinking Ethics in Law Enforcement
Law enforcement leaders must accept the possibility of pervasive unethical conduct and quickly address such incidents. Finally, law enforcement agencies should frequently discuss ethics in the workplace. 14 Like physical fitness, ethical fitness requires constant practice. Case studies provide an effective tool for this continual reinforcement ...
Discussion as a Strategy for Educating Law Enforcement Officers
Students prefer to become actively involved in their learning and use their experiences as a resource for others. 1 Many components of law enforcement training now include andragogical, or self-directed and practice-based, approaches to address the needs and interests of LEOs. 2 Such changes in curriculum help officers prepare for what they will encounter in community policing as well.
(PDF) i HIGHER ORDER, CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS IN ...
Law enforcement requires the officer to invoke reason and critical thinking skills in order to solve intricate problems in real time, on the job.
New HKS research asks communities what reimagining public safety means
Working with focus groups in Roxbury, Dorchester, East Boston and South Boston—communities that have different racial and class compositions but share a troubled relationship with law enforcement—the team gained insights on what residents need to thrive and what role policing can play.