Victimization among Middle and High School Students: A Multilevel Analysis

Abstract

The present study used multilevel modeling techniques to examine the role of school-level and individual level predictors in the explanation of student victimization. This study tests the life-style and routine activity theory of victimization. Base year and first follow-up data from the National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS: 88) was used. For eighth graders, school-level factors were significant predictors, whereas for the tenth graders, student-level factors were more important. Lifestyle and substance abuse variables were significant predictors of victimization even after controlling for school-level predictors. Introduction Victimization and other problems across the schools in the US continue to be a topic of great concern among the American public, researchers, and policy makers. Over the last 50 years there has been a drastic shift in the nature of problems in schools. For example, in the 1940s when teachers were asked about the top school problems, they reported things like chewing gum, making noise, littering, and so on - a list that is almost laughable in its innocence, however in the 1980s teachers listed problems such as drug and alcohol use, rape, robbery, suicide and such other problems (Lexington Herald-Leader, 1993). The 1990 annual poll of the Public's Attitudes toward Public Schools reported that the highest priority be given to freeing every school in America from drugs and creating a school environment conducive for learning (Elam, 1990). The concern about the prevalence of violence, victimization, and disorder in the American schools is reflected in the National Education Goals Report (1992) which states that By the year 2000, every school in America will be free of drugs and violence and will offer a disciplined environment conducive to learning. Most of the attention that has been directed to school crime is due to the concern that students and teachers are affected in some way due to threats, assaults and injuries. In addition to the costs to the victims and their families, school crimes disrupt education and may have longer lasting effects on society than crime committed elsewhere (Bastian & Taylor, 1991). A very important consequence of school crime is that it reduces the effectiveness of education, especially in the public schools in large cities (Toby, 1980). About one in four public school teachers ranked physical conflicts among students as serious or moderately serious problems across their schools (Mansfield, Alexander, & Farris, 1991). According to Toby (1980), teachers in high-crime schools are afraid to demand more in-class and out-of-class efforts because work may be regarded by students as unpleasant. The impact of school disorder on opportunities to learn could be great. Jones (1979) estimates that about 55% of instructional time is lost to minor classroom disturbances. Prevalence of Victimization The National Crime Victimization Survey results show that an estimated 2.7 million violent incidents are reported annually either at school or near school (NCES, 1998). The National Crime Victimization Survey defines victimization as direct personal experience of threats or harm. The Safe School Study, one of the earliest studies on school violence, found that school crime is a serious problem (ME, 1978). The National Education Goals Report (1992) shows that between 1990 and 1991 there was an increase in the number of twelfth grade students who report to have been threatened with a weapon. The School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education and the Department of Justice, found that 14.6 percent of students reported victimization in schools in 1995 (Chandler, Chapman, Rand, and Taylor, 1998). The survey found prevalence of more property (11.6%) than violent (4.2%) victimization among school children. Young (12 year olds, 6.8%), middle school (8th grade, 16o), and male (5. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 47 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.