DOI: 10.3886/icpsr37295.v1
title: Teacher Victimization: Understanding Prevalence, Causation, and Negative Consequences in a Large Metropolitan Area in the Southwestern United States, 2016-2017
title: Version 1

description: This two-year longitudinal research examined the prevalence of seven different types of teacher victimization, its negative consequences among victimized teachers, and predictors of aggression directed against teachers. The research, using a stratified multistage cluster sampling design, surveyed 1,628 middle and high school teachers in 14 school districts, located in a large metropolitan area in the southwest region of the United States. Two waves of the longitudinal research collected 1) teachers' socio-demographic factors, 2) teacher classroom management styles, and 3) school climate factors which are related to teacher victimization. Also, the data contained characteristics of victimization, school responses to teacher victimization, and negative consequences of teacher victimization.
description: The purpose of the study is to investigate teacher victimization in its scope, predictors, and negative consquences. Specifically, three gaps in the current literature are addressed: 1) the types of victimization and their frequencies, such as theft, physical assault, sexual harassment, verbal abuse, non-physical contact aggressive behaviors, and bullying (online and in-person); 2) causal predictors of teacher victimization, such as teacher sociodemographic factors, classroom behaviors, and school climate; and 3) the negative consequences of teachers' victimization, such as impact on job performance, trust of students, concern with school safety, and job turnover.
description: The study utilized a longitudinal design, collecting data across two waves (2016, 2017). Teachers selected for the sample were invited to participate through a Qualtrics survey link. Participants who initially responded (n = 1,628) were recontacted for follow-up one year later (n = 1,317).
description: Variables for Waves 1 and 2 are grouped into the following categories. Respondent demographics and job-related items (age, gender, race, teaching experience, school level, subjects taught); Respondent's classroom management style ("I get angry quickly," "I explain things clearly," "My class is pleasant"); Fulfillment of professional duties: able to provide alternative explanations when students are confused, help students value learning; School climate: support from administration/colleagues, safety/security measures, knowledge of expectations, teacher autonomy; Victimization incident details: frequency, offender demographics, how it was handled, physical and psychological health following event; Feelings of being connected to one's school ("I care what my students think of me," "I get bored in school a lot"); Job satisfaction and performance (fulfilling tasks, competency, proficiency, overall satisfaction); Items unique to Wave 2 are adapted scales for depressive symptoms and job burnout. For respondents who are former teachers in Wave 2, a series of items asks about reasons why they left teaching, specifically if victimization was the cause.
description: ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes..
description: Presence of Common Scales: None
description: Response Rates: Wave 1: 52 percent Wave 2: 81 percent (retention)
description: Datasets: DS1: Waves 1 and 2 Data
description: web-based survey
description: Middle and high school teachers in the region. Smallest Geographic Unit: None
description: To collect a representative sample of teachers in the region, a stratified multistage cluster sampling design was used. First, the sampling frame was constructed by obtaining the lists of middle and high school teachers provided by each school district and/or collected from publicly available school websites. Second, approximately 10 to 30 teachers in each school were randomly selected based on the number of teachers listed at the school. For example, up to 30 teachers were randomly selected in a high school with at least 100 faculty members, while around 10 teachers were selected in a middle school with approximately 30 to 40 teachers.