The Broken Window Theory in the Classroom

In 1982, James Wilson and George Kelling proposed an idea called the Broken Windows Theory which held that crime is a result of a disorderly environment. If we see a broken window in a neighborhood that has gone unfixed for a long time, we tend to reason that no one cares or no one is […]

In 1982, James Wilson and George Kelling proposed an idea called the Broken Windows Theory which held that crime is a result of a disorderly environment.

If we see a broken window in a neighborhood that has gone unfixed for a long time, we tend to reason that no one cares or no one is in charge and therefore it is okay to commit more infractions. This type of environment then causes more serious crimes; because the broken window gives us the tacit approval to commit more crimes. In essence, if the police tackles simple infractions, they wouldn’t become gateways to serious crimes. For example, if the police prevent public drinking, that would not show the way to criminals to commit car theft.

• Kidnappings, killings put Nasarawa on edge
• Maggot therapy: We’ve saved 30 patients from amputation – AKTH entomologist

Accordingly, crime fighters, especially the police have used the The Broken Window Theory to fight crimes in many neighborhoods. For example, Rudy Guilliani, as the mayor of New York used it as the basis of cleaning up graffiti to drive down crimes.

While James Q. Wilson and George Kelling proposed the theory, it was Malcolm Gladwell who popularized it in his book “The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference.”

In the book, he wrote:

”Broken Windows was the brainchild of the criminologist James Q. Wilson and George Kelling. Wilson and Kelling argued that crime is the inevitable result of disorder. If a window is broken and left unrepaired, people walking by will conclude that no one cares and no one is in charge. Soon, more windows will be broken, and the sense of anarchy will spread from the building to the street on which it faces, sending a signal that anything goes. In a city, relatively minor problems like graffiti, public disorder, and aggressive panhandling, they write, are all the equivalent of broken windows, invitations to more serious crimes.”

Britannica says the “theory links disorder and incivility within a community to subsequent occurrences of serious crime.”

Is there any Evidence on Broken Windows Policing?

A 2015  systematic review by Braga, Welsh and Schnell showed that policing strategies directed at disorder, “had a statistically significant, modest impact on reducing all types of crime, ” reported the  Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy.

Also, the prestigious academic journal Science reported, “One example of disorder, like graffiti or littering, can indeed encourage another, like stealing”.

For a very long time, I have wondered if the Broken Windows Theory applies to education – especially to our schools and classrooms. It turns out that I was in good company: many teachers have written about it.

“Just as enforcing minor quality-of-life crimes can benefit cities and neighborhoods, “Micheal Listin wrote, “enforcing classroom rule violations that many teachers perceive to be not worth the time are, in fact, very much worth the time.”

Listin then shared a scenario:

”Imagine you are standing in front of an open closet or a row of hooks along a wall of your classroom, looking at a collection of student backpacks. Some of the backpacks are lying rumpled on the floor, some are hanging sideways from a shoulder strap, and a few are hanging appropriately by the center “hook” loop. Several of the backpacks are unzipped, exposing various articles of clothing and old assignments. Is this scene an invitation for more frequent and more serious disruptive behaviors?”

Listin’s point is a valid one. When I was a primary school teacher, I always believed that a littered classroom messed up my pupils’ thinking. Even today, when I visit schools, I find myself picking up books, straightening chairs, and arranging them in a neat row.

Tom Bailey, another teacher agrees: “Regardless of whether you teach in an urban school or rural or suburban, students will attempt to “break a window” so-to-speak. It will usually start with something small — a headphone hidden and in, a glance at a cell phone, an attempt to change seats from the original assigned seating chart, a tardy here or there, a backpack brought to class, etc., little things — that by themselves do not actually come to much of a violation. However, without “fixing the window” early, often, consistently, and strategically, these little things can and will lead to a deleterious effect on the overall classroom environment.”

So next time you have a rowdy class, check if your environment is not causing it. Look around for broken windows such as papers on the floor and minor infractions you ignore.