School Climate and Delinquency

1. School Climate and Delinquency Denise C. Gottfredson Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice University of Maryland October 21, 2008

2. This Presentation • Summarize research relating school environmental factors and delinquency • Summarize what is know about the effectiveness of interventions to alter school climate • Next steps for research and practice

3. What is “School Climate” “Personality is to the individual what ‘climate’ is to the organization” (Halpin & Croft, 1963)

4. School-Related Individual Factors vs. School Factors • Attachment/commitment to school • Beliefs about norms for behavior • School performance • Self-control • Association with deviant peers Research summarized in Gottfredson (2001)

5. Taxonomy of School Climate • Ecology • Milieu • Social System • Social organization • Administration and management • Culture • Peer culture • Sense of community Adapted from Tagiuri (1968)

6. School Culture School Milieu Peer Culture Sense of Community Community Context Individual Attitudes, Behaviors and Beliefs Problem Behavior Social System School Ecology Social Organization Admin./ Management

7. Social Organization • Curricular offerings and organization • Time allocated to instruction and to different content areas • Grouping of students for instruction (e.g., tracking) • Attention to student heterogeneity (e.g., extra support for low achievers) • Unknown effects on delinquency

8. Administration and Management • Discipline management – fairness and clarity of school rules • Teacher and student shared decision-making • Decision-making/problem solving structures • Strong leadership: establishing a central mission/clarity of goals • Effective communication • Important predictors, manipulable

9. Culture • Peer norms/culture • Cooperative emphasis • Positive relationships – “ethos of caring” • Consensus about norms for behavior • Expectations/emphasis on academics • Important predictors, manipulable

10. History of Research on School Climate and Delinquency • 1970’s: Comparison of school means on student outcomes demonstrating large variability in outcomes across schools • Early to Mid 1980’s: refined community measures, broadened school characteristics to include important aspects of social organization, school culture, and school administration

11. Safe School Study • 1976 national sample of 642 secondary schools • Extensive data collection: Principal, teacher, and student surveys • Extensive questioning: victimization experiences, personal characteristics, and characteristics of schools • Census data on the school communities Gottfredson and Gottfredson, 1985

12. Characteristics Related to Teacher Victimization Rates: Community and School Milieu Variables • Characteristics of the students and communities in which the schools were located accounted for 54% and 43% for jr. and sr. high schools. • Controlling for these characteristics, characteristics of the schools accounted for an additional 12% and 18% of variance

13. School Characteristics Contributing to Higher Teacher Victimization Rates: School Administration/Management Variables • Greater use of ambiguous sanctions • Lower perceptions among students that rule enforcement is firm and clear (junior high schools) • Less teacher-administration cooperation (senior high schools)

14. School Characteristics Contributing to Higher Teacher Victimization Rates: School Culture Variables • Lower student beliefs in the conventional social rules (sr. high schools) • More punitive teacher attitudes • More democratic attitudes of teachers (jr. high schools only)

15. National Study of Delinquency Prevention in Schools • Intended to describe … • level of crime and disorder • policies and practices currently being implemented to increase school safety or reduce disorder

16. Sampling Design • Nationally representative sample of schools stratified by location and level • Probability sample of 1287 schools • First principal survey in 1997 • Second principal survey, student and teacher surveys in 1998

17. Study 1: Research Questions • To what extent is school disorder explained by externally determined characteristics of the school and community? • To what extent are perceived fairness and clarity of rules and more positive school psycho-social climates related to school disorder?

18. Survey Measures

19. Measuring Exogenous Variables

20. Variance in School Disorder

21. Structural Model

22. Conclusions, Study 1 • School climate factors explained greater % of variance than exogenous variables (delinquency and teacher victimization) • Schools with greater perceived fairness and clarity of rules had lower student delinquency and student victimization • Schools with more positive psycho-social climates had lower teacher victimization

23. Communal Social Organization Schools in which “…members know, care about, and support one another, have common goals and sense of shared purpose, and…actively contribute and feel personally committed” (Solomon et al., 1997)

24. Study 2: Research Questions • Do schools with higher levels of communal school organization have lower levels of school disorder? • If so, is the effect of communal school organization on school disorder mediated by student bonding?

25. Measurement Model: School Factors

26. Effects of CSO

27. Mediation Model

28. Conclusions, Study 2 • More communal schools experience less student delinquency and teacher victimization • The effect of communal school organization on student delinquency is mediated by student bonding

29. Study 3: Research Questions Cross-level interactions: Does CSO interact with student bonding such that student bonding has less of an effect on delinquency in schools that are more communally organized?

30. Results, Study 3 The relationship between bonding and delinquency is influenced by CSO: Attachment and belief have less effect on delinquency in higher CSO schools

31. Lessons from School Shootings Source: National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. (2003) Deadly Lessons: Understanding Lethal School Violence. Case Studies of School Violence Committee. Washington DC: The National Academies Press. http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10370#toc

32. Characteristics of the Communities • Gulf between youth culture and adults • Shooters intensely concerned about status and protecting themselves • Adults had poor understanding of children’s experiences • Shooters felt there was “nowhere to turn” • Specific warnings given and missed

33. Recommendations for Reducing School Shootings • (among others) • Take threats and warnings very seriously • Improve efforts to communicate with students

34. School Climate and Delinquency -- Important Dimensions • Administration and management of school discipline • Communal social organization

35. Classification of School-Based Prevention Activities: Individually-oriented • Prevention curriculum, instruction, or training • Cognitive behavioral or behavior modification interventions • Counseling/social work/therapeutic interventions • Individual attention/mentoring/tutoring/ coaching • Recreational, enrichment and leisure activities • Referral to other agencies/other services

36. Classification of School-Based Prevention Activities – Environmental Change • Improved instructional methods or practices • Improved classroom mgmt methods or practices • Distinctive culture/climate for interpersonal exchanges • Communication of norms/expectations for behavior • Use of external personnel resources in clsrms • Youth roles in regulating/responding to student conduct • School planning structure/process or management of change • Security and surveillance • Rules, policies, regulations, laws, or enforcement

37. Environmental Change Strategies, Cont. • Services to families • Provision of information • Reorganization of grades, classes, or school schedules • Exclusion of weapons or contraband • Alter school composition • Training or staff development intervention • Architectural features of the school • Treatment or prevention interventions for administration, faculty, or staff

38. Mean Effect Size on Crime and Anti-Social Behavior Source: Gottfredson, Wilson, and Najaka (2002) * p < 0.05 † Inverse variance weighted mean effect size (random effects model). ‡ Number of effect sizes contributing to the analysis.

39. Mean Effect Size on Crime and Anti-Social Behavior Source: Gottfredson, Wilson, and Najaka (2002) * p < 0.05; † Inverse variance weighted mean effect size (random effects model)., ‡ Number of effect sizes contributing to the analysis.

40. Project PATHE • Author: Gottfredson, 1986, 1990 • Intervention Category: school and discipline management interventions • Participants: middle and high school students • Program Description: comprehensive program to alter school organization and management structures; designed to reduce school disorder and improve the school environment to enhance students’ experiences and attitudes about school • Implementer: school staff • Duration/Intensity: 2 years (middle) or 1 year (high) • Effect of Program: • decreased crime (middle school=.31* / high school=.15*) • decreased anti-social behavior (middle school=.16* / high school=.21*) • decreased substance use (middle school=.33* / high school=.15*)

41. Child Development Project • Author: Battistich, Schaps, Watson, & Solomon, 1996 • Intervention Category: classroom or instructional management • Participants: elementary school students • Program Description: program includes “cooperative learning” activities, a values-rich literature-based reading and language arts program, a positive approach to classroom management, “community building” activities, and “home-school” activities to foster parent involvement • Implementer: teachers • Duration/Intensity: 2 years • Effect of Program: • decreased crime (.27*) • decreased substance use (.19*)

42. Bullying Prevention Program • Author: Olweus, 1991, 1992; Olweus & Alsaker, 1991 • Intervention Category: establishing norms or expectations for behavior • Participants: elementary school students • Program Description: school-wideprogram designed to alter environmental norms regarding bullying; among the recommended strategies are establishing clear class rules against bullying, regular class meetings to clarify norms, and contingent responses (praise and sanctions) • Implementer: teachers • Duration/Intensity: 20 months • Effect of Program: • decreased crime • decreased anti-social behavior (bullying)

43. Project STATUS • Author:Gottfredson, 1990 • Intervention Category:reorganization of grades or classes • Participants:high risk students in grades 7 an 9 • Program Description:“school-within-a school;” integrated social studies and English class, including a law-related education curriculum and instructional methods emphasizing student participation, cooperative learning • Implementer:school teachers • Duration/Intensity:1 school year, 2 hours per day • Effect of Program: • decreased crime (.36*) • decreased anti-social behavior (.23) • decreased substance use (.40*)

44. Importance of Quality Implementation • Most studies implemented in amenable schools with higher than average conditions for implementation • Most studies monitored closely by researchers • These conditions do not translate easily to the real world • Positive effects unlikely to be obtained under more typical implementation conditions

45. Percentage Distribution of Quality in Typical School-Based Prevention Activity Percentage of quality Grade dimensions rated “adequate” A 90% - 100% 18 B 80% - 89% 11 C 70% - 79% 11 D 60% - 69% 13 F < 60% 47 Total 100

46. How to Increase Fidelity • Ensure principal support • Provide high quality training • Supervise prevention activities • Use structured materials and programs when possible • Integrate programs into normal school operations • Embed the program in a school planning activity

47. Final Recommendations – For Research • Standardization in definition of “school climate” needed • Additional research needed to experimentally test school climate interventions • Cross-level interactions need to be further investigated – How to individual-level and school-level effects interact?

48. Final Recommendations – For Practice • Improve school climate, especially • Build stronger bonds between adults and youths • Enhance communication • Promote fair and clear rule enforcement • Pay attention to the fidelity of implementation

49. Thank You! • Denise C. Gottfredson • Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice • University of Maryland • 301-405-4717 • dgottfredson@crim.umd.edu

50. References Gottfredson, G. D., & Gottfredson, D. C. (1985). Victimization in schools. New York: Plenum. Gottfredson, D. C. (2001). Schools and Delinquency. New York: Cambridge University Press. Wilson, D. B., Gottfredson, D. C., & Najaka, S. S. (2001). School-based prevention of problem behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 17(3), 247-272. Gottfredson, D. C., Wilson, D. B., & Najaka, S. S. (2002). School-based crime prevention. In Sherman, L. W., Farrington, D. P., Welsh, B. C., & MacKenzie, D. L. (eds.). Evidence-Based Crime Prevention. London, UK: Routledge. Gottfredson, D. C., Wilson, D. B., & Najaka, S. S. (2002). The schools. In Wilson, J. Q., & Petersilia, J. (eds.). Crime: Public Policies for Crime Control. 2nd Edition. Oakland, CA: ICS.