Securing Temple's Ivory (Bell) Tower

When Matt Davis spoke to our class he talked a great deal about the importance of community partnerships. He discussed a future community center project that would be shared by both the students of Temple University and members from the surrounding community. He also discussed the possibility of mixed housing. While I believe these are some of the most important initiatives that Temple University should undertake, these ideas are not conceivable considering the current state of Temple’s main campus. In fact it seems Temple does everything in its power to “protect” the “students, employees, and visitors” from the surrounding neighborhoods.1 Temple officials have fabricated a border around the university using armed “professional law enforcement officers,” “a security division,” “state-of-the-art communications system,” and “an extensive lighting system.”2 Temple claims the purpose of this fortification is to “prevent” crime and to “improve the quality of life [on campus].”3 I believe the border around Temple University’s campus shares many similarities with the militarized border dividing the United States from Mexico. I believe this border is a primary reason why community partnerships and bridge-building initiatives are unfeasible at this point in time.

When surveying the literature released by the Temple University Police department concerning the organization’s raison d’etre one is struck by how much the word “prevention” is used. In fact the police department’s motto is “Prevention, Partnership and Pride.”4 While this entire motto will be broken down throughout course of this essay, “prevention” is the first word that will be analyzed. By using the word “prevention,” the Temple Police assume that the viewer of the “campus safety services” video already has a certain perception of the areas surrounding Temple University’s campus. This of course is a negative and most likely racist/class-biased view that equates the working class neighborhoods surrounding Temple as unruly and very dangerous. When watching the “Campus Safety Services” video one is given the impression that without the armed bike patrol, “state-of-the art” security system, and the “extensive lighting” system a person’s safety on Temple’s campus would be in serious question.

In his extensive book on the US/Mexico border Joseph Nevins states, “Discourse always operates in the service of particular interests of power. As such, discourse can help to construct territories and boundaries and those who belong within, the ‘we’ as well as the ‘they’ or ‘other.’ By establishing binary oppositions between ‘us’ and ‘them,’ discourse reinforces group identity.”5 Instead of focusing its “discourse” on the historical and structural reasons for potential economic crime in the areas surrounding Temple University’s Main Campus and possible solutions to these problems, the “Campus Safety Services” video only talks about how it achieves “safety” for “students, staff and visitors.” The surrounding neighborhoods are not mentioned at all in the video, it can be implied that the surrounding areas are so dangerous that Temple has been forced to establish a militarized boundary around the campus. This discourse establishes Nevins’ “binary” of “us” and “them.” “Us” being Temple’s “students, staff and visitors” and “them” being those people who live in the surrounding communities which are thought to be very dangerous. Temple can be viewed as a nation-state, in order to be a legal citizen you must live, work or study within its borders and of course you must always have your proof of citizenship (owl card ID).

As Nevins also suggests this border discourse also “reinforces group identity.” One can assume that this video production was made with a specific audience in mind. One of the key commentators in this video is Scott Alessandro. Alessandro is the assistant director of the Temple University honors program. Alessandro states with all the conviction and demeanor of your favorite car salesman, “I have no hesitation telling prospective students and their parents that Temple is a safe place to learn.”6 Why would producers feature Alessandro as a spokesman for the University above all others? Most likely the reason is because it is his job to attract “honor students” to the university. A prospective Temple University honor student is a specific kind of student from a particular place. Most people who are in the Temple University honors program enter as freshman. The Temple Honors website states, “Entering first year students are automatically selected for admission to the Honors Certificate Program based on SAT scores and high school GPA.”7 There is a strong class correlation between SAT scores and class status. Harold Berlak asserts, “What standardized achievement tests appear to predict best are parents' wealth and scores on other similarly constructed tests. As reported by Peter Sacks, socio-economic class accounts for approximately 50 percent of the variance in SAT test scores. He estimates that for every additional $10,000 in family income, a person on average gains 30 points on the SAT.”8 It is common knowledge that America’s wealthiest citizens are predominantly white and are overwhelming from segregated suburbs.

By creating a guarded border between Temple (“us”) and the surrounding working-class neighborhoods (“them”), Temple hopes to make affluent white suburbanites feel (as the first male to speak in the security services video states) “more at home.”9 This border “reinforces” most prospective “honor students’” class group identity by making them feel as though it is unsafe where there are no red banners, or where there is not a bicycle cop on patrol i.e. where the poor people live. This perspective is cultivated in the often racially segregated affluent suburbs (or home). The “prevention” in the Temple University police motto can be interpreted as “prevention” of affluent students from not coming to or leaving the university for fear of the surrounding working class predominantly African American and Latino neighborhoods. Aside from similar discourses surrounding the reason for their existence, both the US/Mexico and Temple University borders share “state-of-the art” technologies that were previously only available to the military.


The first time I drew a comparison between the US/Mexico border and Temple University’s campus was during a walk I was taking at night on campus. The campus’ infamous lighting (in the name of security) system reminded me so much of images in my mind from my time studying along the border last year. Soon I began to notice the overwhelming presence of the police especially at night as well as the alarming abundance of surveillance cameras present throughout campus. Armed men, lights and cameras; Temple had its own border it was just on a bit of a smaller scale. Temple uses some of the same technology to police its border as the US Border Patrol. Peter Andreas and Richard Price in their article From War Fighting to Crime Fighting believe that the line between law enforcement and the US military is blurring. One of the examples they cite regarding this phenomenon is the use of “military hardware and technology for police use.”10 Andreas and Price state, “Technologies previously off-limits to law enforcement are now being converted for border control tasks. For example, The Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) Office of Technology has worked with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to use ‘face trace’ technology, which allows the Border Patrol to identify individuals by scanning their facial structures and matching them to out standing warrants.”11 The Temple University police website claims that Temple University detectives use, “facial composite software to help identify offenders.”12 All the officers, lights, cameras and “state-of-art technology” used to defend the 500 yard radius around Temple University campus does not solve the problems of the surrounding community that lead to petty economic crime. The same is true for the US/Mexico border, all the billions of dollars the government spends on technology, arms and agents does not address the problems that lead people to cross the border nor does it stop them from doing so.

Large-scale community partnership efforts, making University resources available to community members and bridge building initiatives could in the long run begin to address the problems that force people to petty economic crime. This is not unfortunately the kind of “partnership” the Temple University police are referring to when they use the word in their motto. The kind of partnership the police are referring to is one between themselves and Temple’s students. This thinking can be seen in the “community outreach” section of their website which includes activities like “Coffee with the Cops” in the (ID required) library. This event would be amazing if neighborhood community members were allowed to engage in dialogue with both Temple’s police as well as students. But they don’t, this is just another attempt to “prevent” “honor student” from leaving school.

Building borders by using arms and surveillance around the campus I would assume would eventually create feelings of resentment in community members. However, some kind of survey would have to be devised in order to prove this point. I would imagine the guns, lighting and cameras must not seem too inviting or friendly. Creating a policed border around campus is an effort by University officials to make campus life as “normal” as possible. Temple is situated in a unique area and thus our experiences here should be equally as unique. They are trying to erase the surrounding community instead of embracing it. As mentioned before these efforts “reinforce group identity” which usually means the identity of white affluent students from the suburbs. This means that in some cases their horizons are not broadened and they still maintain a feeling of superiority/fear towards working class people. As Temple GUS/Social Science students we should question the militarized border around campus. We should plead for less funding for “face trace” technology an more for community-bridging workshops, mixed residences and more sharing of our vast resources. Will cops with guns, cameras and all the lights of Las Vegas make any social change?

Author’s Note: There are still many comparisons that can be draw between the US/Mexico and Temple borders. A large research paper which explores things like the history of the Temple Police department, funding, segregation of honors students, Mike Davis' discussion of LA archiechture, community sentiments, and the meaning of “safety” would truly do the subject justice.

The Security Services Promo Video can be seen here: http://css.ocis.temple.edu/about_us/video.aspx

Photo Credits in Acending Order:
1. www.temple.edu.
2. The Sun Never Sets on the British Empire and........ Temple University?
Taken From the security services website: http://css.ocis.temple.edu
3-4. Take from www.borderpatrol.com This is a horrid website. Don't check it out.

Works Cited.
1. "Temple University Campus Safety Services." Temple University. 03 May 2006 http://css.ocis.temple.edu/.
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
4.Ibid.
5. Nevins, Joseph. Operation Gatekeeper: the Rise of the Illegal Alien and the Making of the US/Mexico Boundary. New York: Routledge, 2002. 159-164.
6. Campus Safety Services.
7. "Honors Applicants." Temple University Honors Program. Temple University. 03 May 2006 http://www.temple.edu/honors/news.htm.
8. Berlak, Harold. "Race and the Achievement Gap." Rethinking Schools 15 (2001). 03 May 2006 http://www.rethinkingschools.org/archive/15_04/Race154.shtml.
9. Campus Safety Service.
10. Andreas, Peter, and Richard Price. "From War Fighting to Crime Fighting: Transforming the American National Security State." International Studies Review 3 (2001): 31-52.
11. Ibid.
12. Campus Safety Services.