DOI: 10.3886/icpsr37929.v1
title: Comprehensive School Safety Initiative, St. Louis County, Missouri, 2016-2019
title: Version 1

description: This multi-year study investigated the causes and consequences of school victimization (e.g., property theft, minor assault, bullying, cyberbullying) as well as factors contributing to safe learning environments (e.g., school disciplinary practices, students' willingness to report dangerous behavior, availability and utilization of victim services). The project includes three annual surveys of students initially enrolled in 12 middle schools in St. Louis County; a summer component consisting of semi-structured interviews with a subsample of 197 students, including in-depth interviews with 37 students the following summer; and two surveys of school personnel. There are three areas of interest that guide this project and are associated with better understanding of the root causes and consequences (i.e., correlates) of school violence: (1) Identification of patterns of school violence: the principal investigators surveyed two student cohorts over three years as they transitioned from middle to high school (7th/8th grades to 9th/10th grades) (2) Identification of correlates of school violence relying on multiple sources, including: the individual (e.g., gang membership, attitudes toward violence), the school and school climate (e.g., willingness to report, awareness and utilization of victim services, views on the procedural justice of school disciplinary practices, gang presence at the school) and the situation (e.g., where, when, and with whom violence occurs) (3) A specific examination of bullying and cyberbullying as unique forms of school violence with regard to their correlates stemming from each source identified above
description: The purpose of this study was to investigate the causes and consequences of school victimization (e.g., property theft, minor assault, bullying, cyberbullying) as well as factors contributing to safe learning environments (e.g., school disciplinary practices, students' willingness to report dangerous behavior, availability and utilization of victim services).
description: The research design included three annual surveys of two cohorts of students initially enrolled in the 7th and 8th grades during the 2016-2017 school year. These same students were surveyed as 8th and 9th grade students in 2017-2018 and as 9th and 10th grade students in 2018-2019. These grades were selected to allow assessment of 1) developmental changes during a critical period of adolescent development and 2) school transitions (the longitudinal design allows researchers to assess the effects of transitioning from middle school to high school on a range of topics). A second component of the research design included in-depth interviews with a subsample of students during the summers of 2018 and 2019. These interviews provide more detailed information about victimization experiences, perceptions of school safety and the factors that affect this, and contacts with the police. A third component of the research design involved anonymous surveys of school personnel during the first year of the study (when all students were in middle school) and during the third year (when all students were in high school).
description: This study includes variables that measure causes and consequences of school victimization and factors contributing to a safe learning environments.
description: Not applicable.
description: Response Rates: <b>Data Files 1-3 (Student Survey Data)</b> There were a total of 4,719 students enrolled in 7th and 8th grades in the twelve schools; of these students, 3,663 (77.6%) returned positive parental permission forms while 165 (3.5%) parents refused; an additional 891 (18.9%) students failed to return a signed form. The 3,663 students with parental consent were eligible to participate in the research: 3,640 (99.4%) assented and completed the initial online survey, 3,165 (86.4%) completed the Wave 2 survey, and 2,753 (75.2%) completed the Wave 3 Survey. The Wave 1 file contains all 3,663 cases, and each wave-specific file contains data on those respondents who completed that wave's survey. <b>Data Files 4-5 (School Personnel Survey Data)</b> Principals were asked to distribute the questionnaire to all personnel. To ensure anonymity, principals used their own methods to distribute the electronic questionnaire link (e.g., school listserv). The study team did not receive information regarding the number of personnel who received the survey in each school; therefore, the study team could not calculate accurate response rates. In Wave 1, 409 personnel competed surveys and 354 personnel did so in Wave 3. <b>Data File 5 (Summer 2018 Interviews)</b> Interviews used a purposive sample and response rates cannot be computed. A total of 197 semi-structured interviews were completed. <b>Data File 6 (Summer 2019 Interviews)</b> Interviews used a purposive sample and response rates cannot be computed. A total of 37 interviews were completed.
description: Presence of Common Scales: None.
description: <b>Data File 1-3 (Student Survey Data)</b> To capitalize on the diversity of St. Louis County, the study team strategically contacted school districts with the goal of including a diverse sample of schools based on school size, location, and percent of students eligible for free and reduced lunch. The study team initiated contact with 23 school districts in St. Louis County to seek their participation in the UMSL CSSI. These efforts resulted in the participation of six districts. There were 12 middle schools in these six districts (three districts had one middle school each, one had two, another had three, and the last one had four) with approximately 4,700 7th and 8th grade students. The six participating districts represented a diverse sample of schools in the St. Louis region and serve students with varying socio-economic backgrounds. For example, five schools had more than 80% of students eligible for free and reduced lunch; four schools had between 41% and 67% eligible); and three schools had less than 41% of students eligible. All the schools are located in districts that are described as suburban, although they are all proximate to St. Louis City. <b>Data File 4-5 (School Personnel Survey Data)</b> Electronic survey links were sent to all school administrators (e.g., principals) and all other personnel (e.g., teachers) during the first (middle school) and third (high school) years of data collection (waves 1 and 3). Principals were asked to distribute the questionnaire to all teachers, administrators, counselors, or other school staff who routinely interact with students. To ensure anonymity, principals used their own methods to distribute the electronic questionnaire link (e.g., school listserv). During both waves of data collection, site coordinators offered numerous updates to school principals, informing them of the number of responses collected from their school's personnel and encouraging more participation. <b>Data File 6 (Summer 2018 Interviews)</b> The semi-structured interviews were designed to obtain additional information from students who had experienced victimization, school sanctions, and/or criminal justice system contact. Our selection process involved three steps. The study team identified eight behavioral outcomes included in the school surveys: 1) traditional bullying, 2) cyberbullying, 3) dual bullying, 4) assault victimization, 5) assault offending, 6) fights, 7) theft offending, and 8) police contact. Responses to these items in the Wave 2 questionnaires were used to identify our initial interview sample. Second, to increase the probability of including youth who were involved in the more serious (and least prevalent) forms of offending and victimization, the study team next identified all respondents who answered affirmatively to any of the following: arrest, attack with a weapon victimization/ offending, cyberbullying-only victimization, and fights - regardless of their involvement in the other activities. Finally, the study team added a third criterion, self-reported substance use, to identify youth involved in a wider range of delinquent behavior. This three-stage selection in a sample of 734 potential respondents. <b>Data File 7 (Summer 2019 Interviews)</b> In the summer of 2019, 37 of the youth who participated in the 2018 summer interviews were re-interviewed in order to obtain more detailed information about their experiences in school and with the criminal justice system. These semi-structured interviews were intended to elicit from youth, in their own words, their views on school safety, experiences with police in- and out-of-schools, and perceptions of government actors. Students were eligible for inclusion in this component of the CSSI study if they 1) participated in all three waves of the in-school student survey and 2) completed the at-home 2018 summer interview.
description: Datasets: DS0: Study-Level Files DS1: Student Survey Wave 1 Data DS2: Student Survey Wave 2 Data DS3: Student Survey Wave 3 Data DS4: Personnel Survey Wave 1 Data DS5: Personnel Survey Wave 3 Data DS6: Student Interview Data
description: Students initially enrolled in 12 middle schools and school personnel in St. Louis County, Missouri. Smallest Geographic Unit: None.
description: face-to-face interview; on-site questionnaire; web-based survey