Search results

Showing 1 – 37 of 37 results.
Curated

Assessing the Role of School Discipline In Disproportionate Minority Contact With the Juvenile Justice System, Texas, 1999-2008 (ICPSR 37186)

Released/updated on: 2018-12-19
Geographic coverage: United States, Texas
Time period: 1999-09-01--2008-08-31

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

This project utilized data originally collected for the project Breaking Schools' Rules (Fabelo et al., 2011), a joint project of the Public Policy Research Institute at Texas A and M University and the Council of State Governments Justice Center on which the Principal Investigator, Miner Marchbanks was a lead data analyst and co-author. Research was conducted at the Education Research Centers of the University of Texas, Austin, and Texas A and M University utilizing individual-level data from the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS), a data system of the Texas Education Agency (TEA), and CASEWORKER, a data management system of the Texas Probation Commission (now the Texas Juvenile Justice Department). The link between these records was conducted by TEA and is described in greater detail in Fabelo et al.

Through secondary analyses of these data, researchers attempted to measure the institutional and individual mechanisms that disproportionately pull and push students of color into the "school-to-prison pipeline." The project explores the predictors of school discipline contact and the resulting consequences of encountering this discipline. The project then moves to an examination of the determinants of progressing through the various decision points in a juvenile justice case. Additionally, the project explores the relationship between school strictness and various educational and juvenile justice outcomes. The "school-to-prison pipeline" (Wald and Losen, 2003) describes an "increasingly punitive and isolating" path through the education system for African American and other at-risk students.

The study collection includes 1 Stata (.do) syntax file (master_final.do) that was used by the researcher(s) in secondary analyses.

Curated
Partially restricted

Developing Knowledge About What Works to Make Schools Safe: Implementation and Evaluation of Tools for Life to Improve School Climate and Safety in Jackson Public School District, Mississippi, 2016-2018 (ICPSR 37600)

Released/updated on: 2023-01-30
Geographic coverage: Jackson (Mississippi), Mississippi, United States
Time period: 2016-01-01--2018-01-01

Tools for Life: Relationship-Building Solutions (TFL) is a program designed to improve school climate and safety through the proactive development of elementary and middle school students' interpersonal skills (relationship-building and communication) and intrapersonal skills (self-regulation and resiliency). In the 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 school years, the Jackson (Mississippi) Public School District (JPSD) implemented TFL in grades 1 through 8. RAND researchers conducted a randomized controlled trial to determine whether TFL, integrated into existing school practices, positively affected school climate and safety in the district.

This project described the implementation of TFL in JPSD, calculated its costs, and evaluated the program's effectiveness. TFL was designed to improve whole-school change in relationships among staff and students, but the project researchers found that implementation of TFL in JPSD schools was generally shallow, and the program was rarely, if at all, implemented across a whole school as it was designed. TFL had little impact: After one year of implementation, there were no practically or statistically significant differences between schools that implemented TFL and those that did not in measures of students' social and emotional, school climate, behavioral, or achievement outcomes. In addition to the uneven implementation of the program, methodological limitations of the study and contextual factors in JPSD may have contributed to these finding.

Curated
Partially restricted

Evaluation of Florida's Avon Park Youth Academy and STREET Smart Program, 2002-2008 (ICPSR 37111)

Released/updated on: 2018-09-07
Geographic coverage: United States, Florida
Time period: 2002-01-01--2008-01-01

The Evaluation of Florida's Avon Park Youth Academy and STREET Smart Program, 2002-2008 contains data gathered on youth involved in programs which aim to increase educational outcomes, increase labor force participation, and reduce recidivism.

Avon Park Youth Academy (APYA) is a secure custody residential facility that provides specialized, remedial education and intensive vocational training to moderate risk youth committed to the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ). The STREET Smart program (SS) was the reentry component of the program, which provided community support and educational and vocational services to APYA participants on a voluntary basis after their release to the community. In the last several years, APYA/SS has received national and international recognition as a "Promising Program" for juvenile offenders. Both the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) and the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) determined that a rigorous evaluation was required to assess whether APYA/SS could progress from a "Promising Program" to an "Evidence-based Practice."

To conduct this evaluation, the National Council on Crime and Delinquency (NCCD) designed and conducted a field trial that randomly assigned youth committed to DJJ to the APYA/SS program or a control group. This experimental design permitted a rigorous test of the hypothesis that compared to the control group, APYA/SS participants would demonstrate more positive educational achievement, increased labor force participation, and reduced recidivism outcomes after community release.

The 360 youth assigned to the experimental control group stayed at APYA for an average of 9.7 months from 2002-2005. Of these, 301 youth completed participation in the SS program by March 2006. The youth were observed for a three-year period after their community release dates. This included an interview following release from incarceration to collect data on educational achievements, employment, and justice system program experiences. All subjects had reached the 36-month follow-up threshold as of May 2008.

Curated
Partially restricted

Evaluation of the Bully-Proofing Your School Program in Colorado, 2001-2006 (ICPSR 21840)

Released/updated on: 2009-03-31
Geographic coverage: United States, Colorado
Time period: 2001-01-01--2006-01-01
Bully-Proofing Your School (BPYS) was a school-based intervention program designed to reduce bullying and school violence. The BPYS program differed from other anti-bullying programs by providing teachers with a specific curriculum that could be implemented in the classroom. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the BPYS program at the elementary school and middle school level. The BPYS outcome evaluation consisted of school climate surveys administered to elementary school students (Part 1), middle school students (Part 2), and staff (Part 3) in both treatment and comparison schools. The design of the data collection for the study was a repeated cross-sectional design. The evaluation of BPYS took place over five years. In the spring semesters of 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006, all participating schools completed a school climate survey. The researchers collected 4,136 completed elementary school surveys (Part 1), 1,627 completed middle school surveys (Part 2), and 1,209 completed staff surveys (Part 3). For the elementary and middle school students, the mode of data collection was an in-class (group administration) anonymous self-completed survey. For the 1,209 staff surveys (Part 3), the mode of data collection was a mail questionnaire. Part 1 variables include sociodemographic and general school information items, school climate variables, school safety variables, and home and family environment variables. Also included is a filter variable which can be used to select the 3,497 cases that were used in the original analyses. Part 2 variables include sociodemographic and general school information variables, school climate variables, school safety variables, substance use variables, home and family environment variables, variables about guns, variables on activities the respondent participated in, and school attendance variables. Part 3 variables include school and staff characteristics variables, questions about general conditions in the school, questions on how the respondent felt about other people working at the school, questions concerning the resources and participation in the school and the community, and questions regarding staff perceptions of safety at the school.
Curated
Partially restricted

Impact Evaluation of Youth Crime Watch Programs in Three Florida School Districts, 1997-2007 (ICPSR 26601)

Released/updated on: 2010-01-29
Geographic coverage: United States, Florida
Time period: 1997-01-01--2007-01-01
The purpose of this study was to assess both the school-level effects and the participant-level effects of Youth Crime Watch (YCW) programs. Abt Associates conducted a four-year impact evaluation of Youth Crime Watch (YCW) programs in three Florida school districts (Broward, Hillsborough, and Pinellas Counties). School-based YCW programs implement one or more of a variety of crime prevention activities, including youth patrol, in which YCW participants patrol their school campus and report misconduct and crime. The evaluation collected both School-Level Data (Part 1) and Student-Level Data (Part 2). The School-Level Data (Part 1) contain 9 years of data on 172 schools in the Broward, Hillsborough, and Pinellas school districts, beginning in the 1997-1998 school year and continuing through the 2005-2006 school year. A total of 103 middle schools and 69 high schools were included, yielding a total of 1,548 observations. These data provide panel data on reported incidents of crime and violence, major disciplinary actions, and school climate data across schools and over time. The Student-Level Data (Part 2) were collected between 2004 and 2007 and are comprised of two major components: (1) self-reported youth attitude and school activities survey data that were administered to a sample of students in middle schools in the Broward, Hillsborough, and Pinellas School Districts as part of a participant impact analysis, and (2) self-reported youth attitude and school activities survey data that were administered to a sample of YCW continuing middle school students and YCW high school students in the same three school districts as part of a process analysis. For Part 2, a total of 3,386 completed surveys were collected by the project staff including 1,319 "new YCW" student surveys, 1,581 "non-YCW" student surveys, and 486 "Pro" or "Process" student surveys. The 138 variables in the School-Level Data (Part 1) include Youth Crime Watch (YCW) program data, measures of crime and the level of school safety in a school, and other school characteristics. The 99 variables in the Student-Level Data (Part 2) include two groups of questions for assessing participant impact: (1) how the respondents felt about themselves, and (2) whether the respondent would report certain types of problems or crimes that they observed at the school. Part 2 also includes administrative variables and demographic/background information. Other variables in Part 2 pertain to the respondent's involvement in school-based extracurricular activities, involvement in community activities, attitudes toward school, attitudes about home environment, future education plans, attitudes toward the YCW advisor, attitudes about effects of YCW, participation in YCW, reasons for joining YCW, and reasons for remaining in YCW.
Curated
Partially restricted

Improving School Safety in the District of Columbia: Evaluating the Safe School Certification Program, 2016-2020 (ICPSR 37892)

Released/updated on: 2022-06-29
Geographic coverage: District of Columbia, United States
Time period: 2016-01-01--2020-01-01
From 2016 through 2020, Child Trends, in partnership with the D.C. Office of Human Rights and the D.C. Office of the State Superintendent of Education, and with funding from the National Institute of Justice's Comprehensive School Safety Initiative, implemented and evaluated the Safe School Certification (SSC) Program, a three-year technical assistance model to support schools in strengthening organizational capacity across eight elements key to improving school climate: leadership, data, buy-in, policy and policy enforcement, student engagement, family and community engagement, training, and programs and practices. To help support schools' efforts, and to evaluate SSC's effectiveness, survey data were collected annually from students, parents, instructional staff, and non-instructional staff at participating schools using the U.S. Department of Education's School Climate Survey (EDSCLS), which was adapted to include measures of sexual orientation and gender identity, grit, and personal experiences of bullying and fights. Additionally, observations using the Classroom Assessment Scoring System - Secondary (CLASS-S) were conducted in a random sample of five classrooms in each participating school each year. Finally, as part of the implementation evaluation, interviews were conducted with the technical assistance providers, points of contact or leadership at participating schools, the SSC developer, and the manager of the Certification Advisory Board (CAB), which provided feedback to schools over the course of implementation through reviews of compiled workbooks.
Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 1995 (ICPSR 6739)

Released/updated on: 1998-04-06
Geographic coverage: United States
This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Surveys (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including type of school, distance from home, and general attendance and monitoring policies. The data present information on the response of the school to student violation of rules, accessibility of drugs, and violence in school, including types of violence and student reaction. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.
Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 1999 (ICPSR 3137)

Released/updated on: 2001-09-20
Geographic coverage: United States
This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after-school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.
Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2001 (ICPSR 3477)

Released/updated on: 2002-09-19
Geographic coverage: United States
This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after-school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in schools, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.
Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2003 (ICPSR 4182)

Released/updated on: 2005-07-29
Geographic coverage: United States
This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after-school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in schools, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.
Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2005 (ICPSR 4429)

Released/updated on: 2008-04-30
Geographic coverage: United States
This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after-school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in schools, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, household income, and marital status are provided.
Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2007 (ICPSR 23041)

Released/updated on: 2009-03-26
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers, academic researchers, practitioners at the federal, state and local levels, and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2009 (ICPSR 28201)

Released/updated on: 2011-01-21
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers; academic researchers; practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels; and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools; students' participation in after school activities; students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules; the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school; student bullying; hate-related incidents; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2011 (ICPSR 33081)

Released/updated on: 2013-03-26
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers; academic researchers; practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels; and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools; students' participation in after school activities; students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules; the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school; student bullying; hate-related incidents; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2013 (ICPSR 34980)

Released/updated on: 2014-12-02
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers; academic researchers; practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels; and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools; students' participation in after school activities; students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules; the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school; student bullying; hate-related incidents; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2015 (ICPSR 36354)

Released/updated on: 2016-12-20
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers; academic researchers; practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels; and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools; students' participation in after school activities; students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules; the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school; student bullying; hate-related incidents; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, [United States], 2017 (ICPSR 36982)

Released/updated on: 2020-02-27
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers; academic researchers; practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels; and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools; students' participation in after school activities; students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules; the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school; student bullying; hate-related incidents; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, [United States], 2019 (ICPSR 37816)

Released/updated on: 2021-06-08
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers; academic researchers; practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels; and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools; students' participation in after school activities; students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules; the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school; student bullying; hate-related incidents; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, [United States], 2022 (ICPSR 38666)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-28
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers; academic researchers; practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels; and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools; students' participation in after school activities; students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules; the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school; student bullying; hate-related incidents; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated
Partially restricted

Outcome Evaluation of the Teens, Crime, and the Community/Community Works (TCC/CW) Training Program in Nine Cities Across Four States, 2004-2005 (ICPSR 25865)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, New Mexico, Massachusetts, Arizona, South Carolina
In 1985, the Teens, Crime, and the Community and Community Works (TCC/CW) program, a collaborative effort by the National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC) and Street Law, Inc., was developed in an effort to reduce adolescent victimization. The purpose of the study was to assess whether the TCC/CW program was successfully implemented and whether it achieved its desired outcome, namely to reduce adolescent victimization. Following an extensive effort to identify potential sites for inclusion in the TCC/CW program outcome evaluation, a quasi-experimental five-wave panel study of public school students was initiated in the fall of 2004. Classrooms in the sample were matched by teacher or subject and one-half of the classrooms received the TCC/CW curriculum while the other half (the control group) was not exposed to the curriculum. A total of 1,686 students representing 98 classrooms in 15 middle schools located in 9 cities in 4 different states were surveyed 3 times: pre-tests in Fall 2004 (Part 1), post-tests in Spring 2005 (Part 2), and through a one-year follow-up survey in Fall 2005 (Part 3). A total of 227 variables are included in Part 1, 297 in Part 2, and 290 in Part 3. Most of these variables are the same across waves, including demographic variables, variables measuring whether the students are involved in extracurricular and other school related activities, community service, religious activities, family activities, employment, or illegal activities and crime, variables measuring the students' views regarding bullying, schoolwork, school and neighborhood violence, property crimes, drug use, alcohol use, gun violence, vandalism, skipping school, inter-racial tensions, neighborhood poverty, and law-enforcement officers, variables measuring how students react to anger, risk, conflict with fellow students, and how they handle long-term versus short-term decision-making, variables measuring group dynamics, variables measuring students' self-esteem, and variables measuring students' awareness of resources in their respective school and neighborhood to address problems and provide support.
Curated
Partially restricted
Simple Crosstabs

Outcome Evaluation of Tribes Learning Communities in California, 2007-2010 (ICPSR 32821)

Released/updated on: 2012-12-20
Geographic coverage: San Francisco, United States, California
Time period: 2007-01-01--2010-01-01
This study was an outcome evaluation that employed a group randomized experimental design to assess the effectiveness of a school-based violence prevention program known as Tribes in preventing youth violence. The study took place in elementary schools in the San Francisco Unified School District and targeted students in Kindergarten through Fifth grade. Within each school, teachers (and their students) were randomly assigned to the experimental condition, with teachers assigned to the intervention condition using Tribes in their classrooms and control teachers delivering usual lessons. Multiple, repeated measures, including teacher surveys and checklists, parent checklists, direct evaluator observations of classrooms, and individual student interviews were employed between May 2007 and November 2010. Researchers gathered data in four major outcome areas: classroom environment, teacher practices, and student behavior and reasoning.
Curated
Partially restricted

Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): School Interview, Wave 2, 1997-2000 (ICPSR 13654)

Released/updated on: 2006-05-17
Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois
Time period: 1997-01-01--2000-01-01
The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) was a large-scale, interdisciplinary study of how families, schools, and neighborhoods affect child and adolescent development. One component of the PHDCN was the Longitudinal Cohort Study, which was a series of coordinated longitudinal studies that followed over 6,000 randomly selected children, adolescents, and young adults, and their primary caregivers over time to examine the changing circumstances of their lives, as well as the personal characteristics, that might lead them toward or away from a variety of antisocial behaviors. Numerous measures were administered to respondents to gauge various aspects of human development, including individual differences, as well as family, peer, and school influences. One such measure was the School Interview protocol. This was adapted from the school section of the Youth Interview Schedule used in the Philadelphia Family Management Study. It included sections addressing school climate, school safety, types of classes the subject had taken, the subject's attitude toward school, past history of repeating or skipping grades, and participation in activities within and outside of school. It was administered to subjects in Cohorts 9, 12, and 15.
Curated
Partially restricted

Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): School Interview, Wave 3, 2000-2002 (ICPSR 13740)

Released/updated on: 2007-02-07
Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois
Time period: 2000-01-01--2002-01-01
The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) was a large-scale, interdisciplinary study of how families, schools, and neighborhoods affect child and adolescent development. One component of the PHDCN was the Longitudinal Cohort Study, which was a series of coordinated longitudinal studies that followed over 6,000 randomly selected children, adolescents, and young adults, and their primary caregivers over time to examine the changing circumstances of their lives, as well as the personal characteristics, that might lead them toward or away from a variety of antisocial behaviors. Numerous measures were administered to respondents to gauge various aspects of human development, including individual differences, as well as family, peer, and school influences. One such measure was the School Interview protocol. This was adapted from the school section of the Youth Interview Schedule used in the Philadelphia Family Management Study. It included sections addressing school climate, school safety, types of classes the subject had taken, the subject's attitude toward school, and participation in activities within and outside of school and in after-school activities. It was administered to subjects in Cohorts 6, 9, and 12. It is closely related to PROJECT ON HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN CHICAGO NEIGHBORHOODS (PHDCN): SCHOOL INTERVIEW, WAVE 2, 1997-2000 (ICPSR 13654).
Curated
Partially restricted

Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Self Report (Young Adult), Wave 2, 1997-2000 (ICPSR 13655)

Released/updated on: 2006-05-12
Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois
Time period: 1997-01-01--2000-01-01
The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) was a large-scale, interdisciplinary study of how families, schools, and neighborhoods affect child and adolescent development. One component of the PHDCN was the Longitudinal Cohort Study, which was a series of coordinated longitudinal studies that followed over 6,000 randomly selected children, adolescents, and young adults, and their primary caregivers over time to examine the changing circumstances of their lives, as well as the personal characteristics, that might lead them toward or away from a variety of antisocial behaviors. Numerous measures were administered to respondents to gauge various aspects of human development, including individual differences, as well as family, peer, and school influences. One such measure was the Self Report (Young Adult) protocol. This was administered to subjects in Cohort 18 and obtained their reflections about their friends, schooling, jobs, family, and their spouses or partners.
Curated

Protective Behaviors of Student Victims of Bullying: A Rare Events Analysis of the 2009 School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (ICPSR 32741)

Released/updated on: 2015-02-25
Geographic coverage: United States
This study explored whether bullied students (ages 12 through 18, in grades 6 through 12, enrolled during the current school year, and not homeschooled) engage in specific protective behaviors that inhibit learning, put other students' safety at risk, or foster a negative school climate. It also explored whether bullied students' behaviors varied by the type of bullying (direct, verbal, indirect, or cyber) endured. The researchers conducted secondary analyses of the NATIONAL CRIME VICTIMIZATION SURVEY: SCHOOL CRIME SUPPLEMENT, 2009 (ICPSR 28201), using rare events logistic regression, a technique that enables examination of the effects of several independent variables on a dichotomous dependent variable. The dataset produced contains a total of 65 variables, including 18 variables describing direct, verbal, indirect, and cyber bullying behaviors, 4 variables describing response behaviors by those bullied, and 28 variables describing student and school characteristics.
Curated
Partially restricted

A Randomized Impact Evaluation of Capturing Kids' Hearts, South Carolina, 2016-2018 (ICPSR 37954)

Released/updated on: 2021-07-29
Geographic coverage: United States, South Carolina
Time period: 2016-01-01--2018-12-31

Funded by the National Institute of Justice, and in collaboration with the Flippen Group, the South Carolina Department of Education, and the districts of Charleston, Georgetown, Greenville, and Richland County Schools, WestEd conducted a randomized controlled trial of violence prevention and a school climate improvement program known as Capturing Kids' Hearts Campus by Design (CKH).

CKH is a skill intensive, systematic process, whole-school intervention, designed to strengthen students' connectedness to school through enhancing protective factors (strong bonds with teachers, clear rules of conduct that are consistently enforced) and targeting modifiable risk factors (inappropriate behavior, poor social coping skills). The CKH training program aims to address the mechanisms and processes of social skills instruction that lead to improved student behavior by promoting skills acquisition (i.e., modeling, coaching, and behavioral rehearsal), enhancing skills performance, removing competing behavior, and facilitating maintenance of social skills.

Components of CKH have been widely used throughout the United States. As of 2013, CKH training has been offered to over 200,000 staff in more than 7,000 schools. Although widely used, the whole package of CKH training and service has not been sufficiently subjected to a rigorous evaluation to assess the effectiveness of the program.

The purpose of this study is to test and evaluate the Capturing Kids' Hearts package of programs and processes offered in the school-wide model, CKH Campus by Design, which includes Capturing Kids' Hearts, Process Champions-Plus, Campus TrAction Pacs, Teen Leadership, CKH Recharged, and Leadership Blueprint.

Curated
Partially restricted

Role of Law Enforcement in Public School Safety in the United States, 2002 (ICPSR 4457)

Released/updated on: 2008-12-24
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2002-01-01--2002-05-01
The purpose of this research was to develop an accurate description of the current involvement of law enforcement in schools. The researchers administered a school survey (Part 1) as well as a law enforcement survey (Part 2 and Part 3). The school survey was designed specifically for this research, but did incorporate items from previous surveys, particularly the School Survey on Crime and Safety and the National Assessment of School Resource Officer Programs Survey of School Principals. The school surveys were then sent out to a total of 3,156 school principals between January 2002 and May 2002. The researchers followed Dillman's mail survey design and received a total of 1,387 completed surveys. Surveys sent to the schools requested that each school identify their primary and secondary law enforcement providers. Surveys were then sent to those identified primary law enforcement agencies (Part 2) and secondary law enforcement agencies (Part 3) in August 2002. Part 2 and Part 3 each contain 3,156 cases which matches the original sample size of schools. For Part 2 and Part 3, a total of 1,508 law enforcement surveys were sent to both primary and secondary law enforcement agencies. The researchers received 1,060 completed surveys from the primary law enforcement agencies (Part 2) and 86 completed surveys from the secondary law enforcement agencies (Part 3). Part 1, School Survey Data, included a total of 309 variables pertaining to school characteristics, type of law enforcement relied on by the schools, school resource officers, frequency of public law enforcement activities, teaching activities of law enforcement officers, frequency of private security activities, safety plans and meetings with law enforcement, and crime/disorder in schools. Part 2, Primarily Relied Upon Law Enforcement Agency Survey Data, and Part 3, Secondarily Relied Upon Law Enforcement Agency Survey Data, each contain 161 variables relating to school resource officers, frequency of public law enforcement activities, teaching activities of law enforcement agencies, safety plans and meetings with schools, and crime/disorder in schools reported to police according to primary/secondary law enforcement.
Curated

School Crime Operations Package (School COP Software) (ICPSR 23543)

Released/updated on: 2008-10-09
Geographic coverage: United States

The School Crime Operations Package (School COP) is a software application developed by Abt Associates Inc. with funding from the National Institute of Justice. School COP is a free software package that persons responsible for school safety can use to enter, analyze, and map criminal incidents and school rule violations that occur in and around K-12 schools. School COP organizes information according to the data model that the United States Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics' Crime, Violence, and Discipline Reporting Task Force recommends. The School COP database includes data related to the incident (e.g., date, time, type, location) and to persons involved in the incident (e.g., name, grade, action taken). In other words, School COP is an incident-based system, rather than a student-based system. School COP offers a variety of techniques for analyzing school incidents, including tabular reports, bar graphs, pie charts, and maps. School COP can be installed on any Windows (95 or later) PC. It requires no other software to run, and is usable without formal training.

The origin of this project is an award to Abt Associates Inc. that was funded under the National Institute of Justice's (NIJ) June 1999 "Safe Schools Technology" solicitation, which requested proposals for innovative approaches to using technology to enhance the safety of our nation's elementary and secondary schools. School COP was initially released on CD-ROM in January 2001, and made available at the School COP Web site in June 2001. This Windows version of School COP was generally designed for individuals, for a single school, or for small offices within a school district. Abt Associates Inc. was subsequently awarded another grant in 2001 to enhance the School Crime Operations Package (School COP) and to conduct an evaluation of this software, which is used to enter and analyze incidents that occur on school campuses.

Two types of enhancements were made. First, an enhanced Windows version of School COP was developed that could run on a local- or wide-area network, thus allowing multiple users within a single school or across multiple schools to share a common School COP database. The enhanced Windows version also included two utilities: a Merge application (which enables a district-level School COP database to be constructed by merging several individual databases) and a Viewer application (which enables users to view -- but not add, edit, or delete -- incident information). Second, Web School COP was developed to meet the diverse information needs of persons charged with maintaining safe schools in large school districts, including persons at the school-level (e.g., principals, assistant principals, security officers, and school resource officers), the district-level (e.g., district-level administrators and security staff), as well as possibly parent organizations and state-level administrators. Web School COP was designed to run on either an Intranet (e.g., the school district's private Internet) or a secure third-party Web server, and was built to run on the current Microsoft Web platform.

The evaluation of School COP entailed case studies of six sites to address three main issues: (1) what decision process do sites go through when deciding whether to use School COP, (2) once the site decides to use School COP, what implementation obstacles exist, including those related to installation, customization, and training, and (3) what benefits do sites realize from using School COP.

Curated

School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS), 2000: [United States] (ICPSR 3964)

Released/updated on: 2010-06-10
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2000-03-27--2000-08-15
The School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) is managed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) on behalf of the United States Department of Education (ED). SSOCS collects extensive crime and safety data from principals and school administrators of public schools in America. Data from this collection can be used to correlate school characteristics with violent and serious violent crimes in American schools. Furthermore, data from SSOCS can be used to assess what school programs, practices, and policies are used by schools in their efforts to prevent crime. SSOCS has been conducted three times, in school years 1999-2000, 2003-2004, and 2005-2006. The 1999-2000 School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS:2000) was developed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) and conducted by Abt Associates Inc. Funding for the survey was provided by the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools. Questionnaire packets were mailed to 3,366 public primary, middle, high, and combined schools. A total of 2,270 public schools submitted usable questionnaires for a weighted response rate of 70 percent. Data were collected from March 27, 2000 to August 15, 2000.
Curated

School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS), 2004 (ICPSR 25681)

Released/updated on: 2010-03-04
Geographic coverage: United States
The School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) is managed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) on behalf of the United States Department of Education (ED). SSOCS collects extensive crime and safety data from principals and school administrators of public schools in America. Data from this collection can be used to correlate school characteristics with violent and serious violent crimes in American schools. Furthermore, data from SSOCS can be used to assess what school programs, practices, and policies are used by schools in their efforts to prevent crime. SSOCS has been conducted three times, in school years 1999-2000, 2003-2004, and 2005-2006. The 2003-2004 School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS:2004) was developed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) and conducted by Abt Associates Inc. Questionnaire packets were mailed to 3,743 public primary, middle, high, and combined schools. A total of 2,772 public schools submitted usable questionnaires for a weighted response rate of 77.2 percent. Data were collected from March 1, 2004, to June 4, 2004.
Curated

School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS), 2006 (ICPSR 25421)

Released/updated on: 2010-03-04
Geographic coverage: United States
The School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) is managed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) on behalf of the United States Department of Education (ED). SSOCS collects extensive crime and safety data from principals and school administrators of United States public schools. Data from this collection can be used to examine the relationship between school characteristics and violent and serious violent crimes in primary schools, middle schools, high schools, and combined schools. In addition, data from SSOCS can be used to assess what crime prevention programs, practices, and policies are used by schools. SSOCS has been conducted in school years 1999-2000, 2003-2004, and 2005-2006. A fourth collection is planned for school year 2007-2008. SSOCS:2006 was conducted by the United States Census Bureau. Data collection began on March 17, 2006, when questionnaire packets were mailed to schools, and continued through May 31, 2006. A total of 2,724 public schools submitted usable questionnaires: 715 primary schools, 948 middle schools, 924 high schools, and 137 combined schools.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Systematic Review of School-Based Programs to Reduce Bullying and Victimization, 1983-2009 (ICPSR 31703)

Released/updated on: 2014-01-24
Geographic coverage: United States, United Kingdom, Switzerland, Global, Spain, New Zealand, Greece, Canada, Czech Republic, Norway, Ireland, Finland, South Africa, Italy, Slovakia, Australia, Germany
Time period: 1983-01-01--2009-01-01
The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of school-based anti-bullying programs in reducing school bullying. The following criteria were used for the inclusion of studies in the systematic review: the study described an evaluation of a program designed specifically to reduce school (kindergarten to high school) bullying; bullying was defined as including: physical, verbal, or psychological attack or intimidation that is intended to cause fear, distress, or harm to the victim; and an imbalance of power, with the more powerful child (or children) oppressing less powerful ones; bullying (specifically) was measured using self-report questionnaires, peer ratings, teacher ratings, or observational data; the effectiveness of the program was measured by comparing students who received it (the experimental condition) with a comparison group of students who did not receive it (the control condition). There must have been some control of extraneous variables in the evaluation by (1) randomization, or (2) pre-test measures of bulling, or (3) choosing some kind of comparable control condition; published and unpublished reports of research conducted in developed countries between 1983 and 2009 were included; and it was possible to measure the effect size. Several search strategies were used to identify 89 anti-bully studies meeting the criteria for inclusion in this review: researchers searched for the names of established researchers in the area of bullying prevention; researchers conducted a keyword search of 18 electronic databases; researchers conducted a manual search of 35 journals, either online or in print, from 1983 until the end of May 2009; and researchers sought information from key researchers on bullying and from international colleagues in the Campbell Collaboration. Studies included in the review were coded for the following key features: research design, sample size, publication date, location of the study, average age of the children, and the duration and intensity of the anti-bullying program for both the children and the teachers.
Curated
Partially restricted

Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS): Wave 1, 2001 (ICPSR 4679)

Released/updated on: 2026-05-13
Geographic coverage: United States, Ohio, Toledo

The Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) explores the relationship qualities and the subjective meanings that motivate adolescent behavior. More specifically, this study seeks to examine the nature and meaning of adolescent relationship experiences (e.g. with family, peers, and dating partners) in an effort to discover how experiences associated with age, gender, race, and ethnicity influence the meaning of dating relationships. The study further investigates the relative impact of dating partners and peers on sexual behavior and contraceptive practices, as well as involvement in other problem behaviors that can contribute independently to sexual risk-taking. The longitudinal design of the Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) includes a schedule of follow-up interviews occurring one, three, five, ten, and about eighteen years after the initial interview. Additional waves have since been conducted.

Wave 1 of TARS includes detailed data collected from both parents and adolescent respondents about their relationship experiences, including self-reported data from parents, parent-reported data about adolescent respondents, and self-reported data from adolescent respondents. These data are available as a combined dataset organized by adolescent respondent.

The Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) includes several waves of data collection available through ICPSR. Please see the ICPSR Series page for available studies.

Curated
Partially restricted

Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS): Wave 2, 2002 (ICPSR 32081)

Released/updated on: 2011-10-04
Geographic coverage: United States, Ohio, Toledo
Time period: 2002-01-01--2003-01-01
This study explores the relationship qualities and the subjective meanings that motivate adolescent behavior. More specifically, this study seeks to examine the nature and meaning of adolescent relationship experiences (e.g., with family, peers, and dating partners) in an effort to discover how experiences associated with age, gender, race, and ethnicity influence the meaning of dating relationships. The study further investigates the relative impact of dating partners and peers on sexual behavior and contraceptive practices, as well as involvement in other problem behaviors that can contribute independently to sexual risk taking. The longitudinal design of the Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) includes a schedule of follow-up interviews occurring one, three, and five years after the initial interview. Three waves of data have been collected (2001, 2002, and 2004) and a fourth wave is scheduled for collection (2006). Data were collected from adolescent respondents through structured in-home interviews utilizing laptop computers. In-depth interviews were conducted at the first wave with a subsample (n=100) of the respondents. Parent data was collected via a short, self-administered questionnaire at the first wave.
Curated
Partially restricted

Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS): Wave 5, 2011 (ICPSR 35486)

Released/updated on: 2024-03-27
Geographic coverage: United States, Ohio, Toledo
Time period: 2011-03-01--2012-12-01

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

This study explores the relationship qualities and the subjective meanings that motivate adolescent behavior. More specifically, this study seeks to examine the nature and meaning of adolescent relationship experiences (e.g., with family, peers, and dating partners) in an effort to discover how experiences associated with age, gender, race, and ethnicity influence the meaning of dating relationships. The study further investigates the relative impact of dating partners and peers on sexual behavior and contraceptive practices, as well as involvement in other problem behaviors that can contribute independently to sexual risk taking.

The longitudinal design of the Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) includes a schedule of follow-up interviews occurring one, three, and five years after the initial interview. Four prior waves of data have been collected (2001, 2002, 2004, and 2006). Data were collected from adolescent respondents through structured in-home interviews utilizing laptop computers.

In addition, the fifth wave, conducted in 2011 when the participants were young adults, builds on prior waves by adding quantitative and qualitative assessments of intimate partner violence (IPV).

Curated
Partially restricted

Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS): Wave 6, 2018-2020 (ICPSR 38016)

Released/updated on: 2024-03-13
Geographic coverage: United States, Ohio, Toledo
Time period: 2018-04-01--2020-04-01

Prior research on parental incarceration has documented negative effects on various forms of child well-being ranging from conduct problems to academic deficits and eventually, an intergenerational cycle of criminal justice involvement. Yet as the National Academy of Sciences committee report on incarceration recently concluded, existing research has not adequately assessed the range of other family circumstances and disadvantages that may co-vary with the parent's criminal justice system involvement, and knowledge about basic mechanisms underlying incarceration effects remains markedly incomplete. This study builds on, a ten-year mixed method longitudinal study, the Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS), that has focused on the lives of a sample of men and women interviewed first as adolescents and four additional times across the transition to adulthood. The TARS study contains data involving patterns and seriousness of parental offending over the complete study period, as well as about other time-varying factors hypothesized to mediate incarceration-child well-being associations.

The primary goal of this study is to collect survey data to examine the effect of parental incarceration on a range of child well-being outcomes, including conduct problems, academic readiness/achievement and emotional and physical health, among children born to participants in the TARS study. Child well-being outcomes includes internalizing and externalizing problems, academic readiness/attainment, and emotional and physical health. This study also includes parental disadvantages across the three subgroups of system contact, including variation in objective and subjective indicators of economic marginality, relationship difficulties, perceived stress, depression, and lack of social support.

Curated
Partially restricted

Wisconsin School Violence and Bullying Prevention Study, 2015-2017 (ICPSR 37228)

Released/updated on: 2021-05-26
Geographic coverage: United States, Wisconsin
Time period: 2015-01-01--2017-01-01

The Wisconsin School Violence and Bullying Prevention Study sought to understand the impact of comprehensive bullying prevention programs on outcomes related to violence, safety, and bullying rates. This study focused on 24 middle schools (grades 6 to 8) in Wisconsin.

To examine the effectiveness of the school's current anti-bullying program, the Bullying Prevention Program Assessment tool (BPPAT) was completed at the end of the school year. The BPPAT focused on administrative policy and procedures geared towards students, faculty, parents, or administrators. This tool examined the following items: policy and procedures, program implementation, staff training, parental education and communication, student training, reporting systems, and continuous quality improvement (CQI). Students and faculty were given surveys to determine bullying rates and perceptions of school safety. The school safety survey was given to all students concerning their bullying victimization and perception of school safety. This survey contains the following demographic variables: age, sex, grade, and race. The verified bullying incident data contains incident reporting from faculty, which focused on the type of bullying and the demographics of the perpetrator and victim. After new bullying prevention programs were implemented, students were given the safety and bullying victimization survey which focused on perceptions of bullying and school safety.

The number of bullying incidents, number of student victims and perpetrators, and the demographic characteristics of victims and perpetrators were retained in aggregate form for each school were submitted to the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) for analysis.