A Macro-Level Model of School Disorder

Abstract

Drawing on school climate theory and social disorganization theory, this article examines the influence of major institutional and community factors on disorder in Philadelphia public schools. Using U.S. census data, school district data, and police data, the authors examined the following predictors of disorder in 43 middle schools: community poverty and residential stability, community crime, school size, and school stability. Community was conceptualized in two ways: local (the census tract around the school) and imported (aggregated measures from the census tracts in which students actually reside). Previous studies have failed to make this distinction when assessing community-level influences on school disorder. The authors used path analysis to examine direct and indirect relationships between community characteristics (poverty, residential stability, crime rates), school size, school stability (a factor score based on student attendance and turnover), and school disorder (a factor score based on school incident data and dismissal rates). The local community model fit the data better than the imported model: The communities immediately surrounding schools have a stronger influence on school disorder than the communities from which students are drawn. Community poverty exerted strong indirect effects on school disorder in both models. The effects of community variables on school disorder were strongly mediated by school stability, illustrating that analyses of institutional processes have much to add to the explanation of school disorder.

Schools, Neighborhoods, and Adolescent Conflicts: A Situational Examination of Reciprocal Dynamics

“…Schools in urban, poor, disorganized communities experience much more violence and other forms of disorder than do schools in rural or suburban, affluent, organized communities." Scholars have sought a number of explanations for these patterns, examining the impact of compositional effects and community factors on student and school characteristics and processes, including student bonding; normative peer culture; economic, human and social resources; school climate; and school organization, including size, educational and disciplinary practices (Felson et al, 1994;Gottfredson, 2001;Gottfredson et al, 2005;Mijanovich & Weitzman, 2003;Payne et al, 2003;Stewart, 2003;Welsh, 2001;Welsh et al, 2000).…”

“…According to Anderson (1999), this is a prominent feature of the "street code," which spills over into the school environment. Anderson (1999, p. 22) observes that "the hallways of the school are in many ways an extension of the street," and provide youths the opportunity to establish and display personas that can result in the acquisition and maintenance of respect (see also Lockwood, 1997;Welsh et al, 2000).…”

“…Researchers have sought a number of explanations for these patterns, examining the roles of individual and compositional, school context, and community setting effects (see, for example, Gottfredson et al, 2005;Payne, Gottfredson, & Gottfredson, 2003;Stewart, 2003;Welsh, Stokes, & Greene, 2000). However, because most research on the topic has been quantitative, scholars have had limited opportunities to thoroughly investigate situational and interactional features of school violence.…”

Violence and Attribution Error in Adolescent Male and Female Delinquents

“…In addition, there is a void in the social psychological literature as to how male and female juvenile delinquents utilize these attribution errors. A careful review of research literature on violence indicates that numerous variables exist that contribute to an adolescent's propensity towards violence (Archwamety & Katsiyannis, 2000;Ball & Connolly, 2000;Carr & Vandiver, 2001;Chesney-Lind & Sheldon, 1992;Goff & Goddard, 1999;Matza, 1964;Stoiber, 1998;Sutherland & Shepherd, 2002;Tanner et al, 1999;Waytowich & Onwuegbuzie, 2007;Welsh et al, 2000). Inasmuch as self-esteem and peer-victimization are useful constructs in predicting adolescent violence (Egan & Perry, 1998;Kaplan et al, 1982;Sutherland & Shepherd, 2002), the current research suggests that violence attribution errors may mediate the relationship between self-esteem and at-risk behaviors, in addition to the association between peer-victimization and at-risk behaviors.…”

“…Although numerous studies have been conducted on key indicators of risk that identify a youth to be on a potential path to delinquency such as poverty, poor self-concept, association with delinquent peers, drug use, physical and sexual abuse, poor parenting, truancy, and poor educational performance (Archwamety & Katsiyannis, 2000;Ball & Connolly, 2000;Carr & Vandiver, 2001;Chesney-Lind & Sheldon, 1992;Goff & Goddard, 1999;Matza, 1964;Stoiber, 1998;Tanner, Davies, & O'Grady, 1999;Waytowich & Onwuegbuzie, 2007;Welsh, Stokes, & Greene, 2000), scant research has been paid attention to predictors of violence attribution errors. Because violence attribution errors have been found to predict acts of violence (Daley & Onwuegbuzie, 2002/2003, it is expected that identifying antecedents of violence attribution errors likely would increase our understanding of why adolescents engage in delinquent behaviors in general and acts of violence in particular.…”