U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Indicators of School Crime and Safety 2001 October 2001, NCJ 190075 ---------------------------------------------------- This file is text only without graphics and many of the tables. A Zip archive of the tables in this report in spreadsheet format (.wk1) and the full report including tables and graphics in .pdf format are available from: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/iscs01.htm This report is one in a series. More recent editions may be available. To view a list of all in the series go to http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pubalp2.htm#indicators. ----------------------------------------------------- October 2001 Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2001 Phillip Kaufman Xianglei Chen Susan P. Choy Katharin Peter MPR Associates, Inc. Sally A. Ruddy Amanda K. Miller Jill K. Fleury Education Statistics Services Institute Kathryn A. Chandler National Center for Education Statistics Michael G. Planty Michael R. Rand Bureau of Justice Statistics U.S. Department of Education, Rod Paige, Secretary Office of Educational Research and Improvement Grover J. Whitehurst, Assistant Secretary National Center for Education Statistics Gary W. Phillips, Acting Commissioner U.S. Department of Justice John Ashcroft, Attorney General Office of Justice Programs Deborah J. Daniels, Assistant Attorney General Bureau of Justice Statistics Lawrence A. Greenfeld, Acting Director The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing, and reporting data related to education in the United States and other nations. It fulfills a congressional mandate to collect, collate, analyze, and report full and complete statistics on the condition of education in the United States; conduct and publish reports and specialized analyses of the meaning and significance of such statistics; assist state and local education agencies in improving their statistical systems; and report on education activities in foreign countries. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing, publishing, and disseminating statistical information about crime, its perpetrators and victims, and the operation of the justice system at all levels of government. These data are critical to federal, state, and local policymakers in combating crime and ensuring that justice is both efficient and evenhanded. October 2001 Suggested Citation Kaufman, P., Chen, X., Choy, S.P., Peter, K., Ruddy, S.A., Miller, A.K., Fleury, J.K., Chandler, K.A., Planty, M.G., and Rand, M.R. Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2001. U.S. Departments of Education and Justice. NCES 2002-113/NCJ-190075. Washington, DC: 2001. This publication can be downloaded from the World Wide Web at http://nces.ed.gov or http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/. Single hard copies can be ordered through ED Pubs at 1-877-4ED-PUBS (NCES 2002-113) (TTY/TDD 1-877-576-7734), and the Bureau of Justice Statistics Clearinghouse at 1-800-732-3277 (NCJ-190075). Contact at NCES: Kathryn Chandler (202) 502-7326 E-mail: Kathryn.Chandler@ed.gov Contact at BJS: Michael Rand (202) 616-3494 E-mail: randm@ojp.usdoj.gov FOREWORD The safety of our students, teachers, and staff at school continues to be the focus of considerable national attention. National indicators affirm that the levels of crime in school have continued to decline, that acts that promote fear and detract from learning are decreasing, and that students feel more safe in school than they did a few years ago. Despite declining rates, students ages 12 through 18 were victims of about 2.5 million crimes of violence or theft at school in 1999. Violence, theft, bullying, drugs, and firearms still remain problems in many schools throughout the country and periodically the news headlines relate the details of a tragic event in a school somewhere in America. Effective programs and policies can only be built on foundations supported by accurate information about the nature, extent, and scope of the problems being addressed. This report is intended to build a foundation of information that will assist in developing policies and/or programs to prevent and cope with violence and crime in schools. This is the fourth edition of Indicators of School Crime and Safety, a joint effort by the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the National Center for Education Statistics. The report provides detailed statistical information to inform the nation on the current nature of crime in schools. This edition of Indicators contains the most recent available data on school crime and safety drawn from a number of statistical series supported by the federal government. These data include results from a study of violent deaths in school, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; the 1999 National Crime Victimization Survey, which is conducted by the Census Bureau on behalf of the Bureau of Justice Statistics; and the Youth Risk Behavior Survey, sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Bureau of Justice Statistics and the National Center for Education Statistics continue to work toward providing more timely and complete data on the issue of school-related violence and safety. Not only is this report available on the Internet in its entirety, but individual indicators are updated there throughout the year as new data become available. Gary W. Phillips Acting Commissioner of Education Statistics Lawrence A. Greenfeld Acting Director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Schools should be safe and secure places for all students, teachers, and staff members. Without a safe learning environment, teachers cannot teach and students cannot learn. Student safety is of concern outside of school as well. In fact, as the data in this report show, more serious victimizations happen away from school than at school. ***Footnote 1: These data do not take into account the number of hours that students spend on school property and the number of hours they spend elsewhere.*** In 1999, students were more than two times as likely to be victims of serious violent crime away from school as at school (Indicator 2).***Footnote 2: "Students" refers to persons 12 though 18 years of age who have attended any grade equal to less than high school. An uncertain percentage of these persons may not have attended school druing the survey reference period.*** In 1999, students ages 12 through 18 were victims of about 2.5 million total crimes at school. In that same year, these students were victims of about 186,000 serious violent crimes at school (that is, rape, sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault) (Indicator 2). There were also 47 school- associated violent deaths in the United States between July 1, 1998, and June 30, 1999, including 38 homicides, 33 of which involved school-aged children (Indicator 1). The total nonfatal victimization rate for young people generally declined between 1992 and 1999. The percentage of students being victimized at school also declined over the last few years. Between 1995 and 1999, the percentage of students who re- ported being victims of crime at school decreased from 10 percent to 8 percent (Indicator 3). This decline was due in large part to the decrease in percentages of students in grades 7 through 9 who were victimized. Between 1995 and 1999, the prevalence of reported victimization dropped from 11 percent to 8 percent for 7th graders, from 11 percent to 8 percent for 8th graders, and from 12 percent to 9 percent for 9th graders. However, the prevalence rates of some types of crimes at school have not changed. For example, between 1993 and 1999, the percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who were threatened or injured with a weapon on school property in the past 12 months remained constant-at about 7 to 8 percent (Indicator 4). As the rate of victimization in schools has declined or remained constant, students also seem to feel more secure at school now than just a few years ago. The percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported avoiding one or more places at school for their own safety decreased between 1995 and 1999-from 9 to 5 percent (Indicator 13). Furthermore, the percentage of students who reported that street gangs were present at their schools decreased from 1995 to 1999. In 1999, 17 percent of students ages 12 through 18 reported that they had street gangs at their schools compared with 29 percent in 1995 (Indicator 15). There was an increase in the use of marijuana among students in grades 9 through 12 between 1993 and 1995, but percentages of students reporting marijuana use were similar in 1995, 1997, and 1999. In 1999, about 27 percent of these students had used marijuana in the last 30 days (Indicator 18). Furthermore, in 1995, 1997, and 1999, about one-third of these students (between 30 and 32 percent) reported that someone had offered, sold, or given them an illegal drug on school property-an increase from 24 percent in 1993 (Indicator 19). Therefore, the data shown in this report present a mixed picture of school safety. While overall school crime rates have declined, violence, gangs, and drugs are still present, indicating that more work needs to be done. ORGANIZATION OF THE CURRENT REPORT This report, the fourth in a series of annual reports on school crime and safety from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) and the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), presents the latest available data on school crime and student safety. The report repeats many indicators from the 2000 report but also provides updated data on fatal and nonfatal student victimization, nonfatal teacher victimization, students being threatened or injured with a weapon at school, fights at school, students carrying weapons to school, students' use of alcohol and marijuana, and student reports of drug availability on school property. The report is organized as a series of indicators, with each indicator presenting data on a different aspect of school crime and safety. It starts with the most serious violence. There are five sections to the report: Violent Deaths at School; Nonfatal Student Victimization--Student Reports; Violence and Crime at School--Public School Principal/Disciplinarian Reports; Nonfatal Teacher Victimization at School-- Teacher Reports; and School Environment. Each section contains a set of indicators that, taken together, describe a distinct aspect of school crime and safety. Rather than relying on data from a large omnibus survey of school crime and safety, this report uses a variety of independent data sources from federal departments and agencies including the BJS, NCES, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Each data source has an independent sample design, data collection method, and questionnaire design, all of which may be influenced by the unique perspective of the primary funding agency. By combining multiple and independent sources of data, it is hoped that this report will present a more complete portrait of school crime and safety than would be possible with any single source of information. However, because the report relies on so many different data sets, the age groups, the time periods, and the types of respondents analyzed can vary from indicator to indicator. Readers should keep this in mind as they compare data from different indicators. Furthermore, while every effort has been made to keep key definitions consistent across indicators, different surveys sometimes use different definitions, such as those for specific crimes and "at school."***Footnote 3: Readers should consult the glossary of terms in appendix C for specific definitions used in each survey.*** Therefore, caution should be used in making comparisons between results from different data sets. Descriptions of these data sets are located in appendix B of this report. KEY FINDINGS All of the comparisons described in this report were statistically significant at the 0.05 level. Some of the key findings from the various sections of this report are as follows:***Footnote 4: See appendix B for details on the statistical methodology.*** VIOLENT DEATHS AT SCHOOL From July 1, 1998, through June 30, 1999, there were 47 school-associated violent deaths in the United States. Thirty-eight of these violent deaths were homicides, six were suicides, two were killed by a law enforcement officer in the line of duty, and one was unintentional (Indicator 1). Thirty-three of the 38 school-associated homicides were of school-aged children. By comparison, a total of 2,407 children ages 5 through 19 were victims of homicide in the United States from July 1, 1998, through June 30, 1999. Four of the six school- associated suicides occurring from July 1, 1998, through June 30, 1999, were of school-aged children. A total of 1,854 children ages 5 through 19 committed suicide that year. NONFATAL STUDENT VICTIMIZATION-- STUDENT REPORTS Students ages 12 through 18 were more likely to be victims of nonfatal serious violent crime-including rape, sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault- away from school than when they were at school (Indicator 2). In 1999, students in this age range were victims of about 476,000 serious violent crimes away from school, compared with about 186,000 at school. * The percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who have been threatened or injured with a weapon on school property ***Footnote 5: Definitions for "on school property" and "at school" may differ. See appendix C for specific definitions.*** has not changed s ignificantly in recent years. In 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999, about 7 to 8 percent of students reported being threatened or injured with a weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school property in the past 12 months (Indicator 4). * In 1999, 12- through 18-year-old students living in urban and suburban locales were equally vulnerable to seri- ous violent crime at school. Away from school, however, urban students were more vulnerable to serious violent crime than were suburban students, and suburban students were more likely to experience serious violent victimization than were rural students. Yet, student vulnerability to theft at school and away from school in 1999 was similar in urban, suburban, and rural areas (Indicator 2). * Younger students (ages 12 through 14) were more likely than older students (ages 15 through 18) to be victims of crime at school. However, older students were more likely than younger students to be victimized away from school (Indicator 2). VIOLENCE AND CRIME AT SCHOOL--PUBLIC SCHOOL PRINCIPAL/DISCIPLINARIAN REPORTS In 1996-97, 10 percent of all public schools reported at least one serious violent crime to the police or a law enforcement representative. Principals' reports of serious violent crimes included murder, rape or other type of sexual battery, suicide, physical attack or fight with a weapon, or robbery. Another 47 percent of public schools reported at least one less serious violent or nonviolent crime (but not a serious violent one). Crimes in this category include physical attack or fight without a weapon, theft/ larceny, and vandalism. The remaining 43 percent of public schools did not report any of these crimes to the police (Indicator 7). * Elementary schools were much less likely than either middle or high schools to report any type of crime in 1996-97. Elementary schools were much more likely to report vandalism (31 percent) than any other crime (19 percent or less) (Indicator 8). * At the middle and high school levels, physical attack or fight without a weapon was generally the most commonly reported crime in 1996-97 (9 and 8 per 1,000 students, respectively). Theft or larceny was more common at the high school than at the middle school level (6 versus 4 per 1,000 students) (Indicator 8). NONFATAL TEACHER VICTIMIZATION AT SCHOOL-- TEACHER REPORTS Over the 5-year period from 1995 through 1999, teachers were victims of approximately 1,708,000 nonfatal crimes at school, including 1,073,000 thefts and 635,000 violent crimes (rape or sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated and simple assault) (Indicator 9). On average, this translates into 79 crimes per 1,000 teachers per year. * During the 1995 through 1999 period, senior high school and middle/junior high school teachers were more likely to be victims of violent crimes (most of which were simple assaults) than elementary school teachers (38 and 54, respectively, versus 16 crimes per 1,000 teachers) (Indicator 9). * Teachers were differentially victimized by violent crimes at school according to where they taught. Over the 5-year period from 1995 through 1999, urban teachers were more likely to be victims of violent crimes than suburban and rural teachers (39 versus 22 and 20, respectively, per 1,000 teachers) (Indicator 9). * In the 1993-94 school year, 12 percent of all elementary and secondary school teachers were threatened with injury by a student, and 4 percent were physically attacked by a student. This represented about 341,000 teachers who were victims of threats of injury by students that year, and 119,000 teachers who were victims of attacks by students (Indicator 10). SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT Between 1995 and 1999, the percentages of students who felt unsafe while they were at school and while they were going to and from school decreased. In 1995, 9 percent of students ages 12 through 18 sometimes or most of the time feared they were going to be attacked or harmed at school. In 1999, this percentage had fallen to 5 percent. During the same period, the percentage of students fearing they would be attacked while traveling to and from school fell from 7 percent to 4 percent (Indicator 12). * Between 1993 and 1999, the percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported carrying a weapon on school property within the previous 30 days fell from 12 percent to 7 percent (about a 42 percent reduction) (Indicator 11). * Between 1995 and 1999, the percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who avoided one or more places at school for fear of their own safety decreased, from 9 to 5 percent. (Indicator 13). * In 1999, about 13 percent of students ages 12 through 18 reported that someone at school had used hate-related words against them. That is, in the prior 6 months someone at school called them a derogatory word having to do with race/ ethnicity, religion, disability, gender, or sexual orientation. In addition, about 36 percent of students saw hate-related graffiti at school (Indicator 14). * Between 1995 and 1999, the percentage of students who reported that street gangs were present at their schools decreased. In 1995, 29 percent of students reported gangs being present in their schools. By 1999, this percentage had fallen to 17 percent (Indicator 15). * In 1999, about 5 percent of students in grades 9 through 12 had at least one drink of alcohol on school property in the previous 30 days. Half of students (about 50 percent) had at least one drink anywhere during the same period (Indicator 17). * There was an increase in the use of marijuana among students in grades 9 through 12 anywhere and on school property between 1993 and 1995, but no change between 1995, 1997, and 1999. About one- quarter (27 percent) of students reported using marijuana anywhere in the last 30 days in 1999 and 7 percent reported using marijuana on school property (Indicator 18). * In 1995, 1997, and 1999, about one- third of all students in grades 9 through 12 (between 30 and 32 percent) reported that someone had offered, sold, or given them an illegal drug on school property. This was an increase from 1993 when 24 percent of such students reported that illegal drugs were available to them on school property (Indicator 19). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors wish to thank the heads of their respective agencies, Gary W. Phillips of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) and Lawrence Greenfield of the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), for supporting this report. We also appreciate the support provided by Bill Modzeleski of the Safe and Drug-free Schools program. Their support of our larger data collection and reporting agendas on school crime and safety make this report possible. From BJS, we wish to thank Callie Rennison of the Victimization Statistics Branch for her work in preparing and verifying data from the NCVS. From NCES, we wish to thank Bruce Taylor, Ilona Berkovits, and Patt Dabbs, who served as reviewers. They each provided input that substantially improved the publication. Outside of NCES and BJS, school crime experts who reviewed the report were John Bishop of Cornell University, Joseph Moone of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and Joanne Wiggins of the Planning and Evaluation Service of the U. S. Department of Education. Their advice was gratefully accepted. We particularly appreciated their willingness to review the report under very strict time constraints. Without the assistance of the following staff at MPR Associates this report could not have been produced: Barbara Kridl (overall production and proofreading), Francesca Tussing (production, proofreading, layout, and editing), Andrea Livingston (editing), and Leslie Retallick (figure design and text layout). They provided invaluable editorial, graphic, and production assistance. TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword Executive Summary Acknowledgments List of Tables List of Figures Violent Deaths at School Violent deaths at school and away from school Nonfatal Student Victimization-Student Reports Victimization of students at school and away from school Prevalence of students being victimized at school Prevalence of students being threatened or injured with a weapon on school property Prevalence of students involved in physical fights on school property Prevalence of students being bullied at school Violence and Crime at School-Public School Principal/Disciplinarian Reports Crimes reported to the police Specific crimes reported to the police Nonfatal Teacher Victimization at School- Teacher Reports Nonfatal teacher victimization at school Prevalence of teachers being threatened with injury or attacked by students School Environment Prevalence of students carrying weapons on school property Students' perceptions of personal safety at school and when traveling to and from school Students' reports of avoiding places in school Students' reports of being called hate- related words and seeing hate-related graffiti Students' reports of gangs at school Public school principals' reports of discipline problems at school Prevalence of students using alcohol Prevalence of students using marijuana Prevalence of students reporting drugs were made available to them on school property Supplemental Tables Standard Error Tables Appendix A. School Practices and Policies Related to Safety and Discipline Appendix B. Technical Notes Appendix C. Glossary of Terms LIST OF TABLES Number of nonfatal crimes against students ages 12 through 18 occurring at school or on the way to or from school, by type of crime and selected student characteristics: 1992 to 1999 Number of nonfatal crimes against students ages 12 through 18 occurring at school or on the way to or from school per 1,000 students, by type of crime and selected student characteristics: 1992 to 1999 Number of nonfatal crimes against students ages 12 through 18 occurring away from school, by type of crime and selected student characteristics: 1992 to 1999 Number of nonfatal crimes against students ages 12 through 18 occurring away from school per 1,000 students, by type of crime and selected student characteristics: 1992 to 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported criminal victimization at school during the previous 6 months, by type of victimization and selected student characteristics: 1995 and 1999 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported being threatened or injured with a weapon on school property during the last 12 months, by selected student characteristics: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported having been in a physical fight in the last 12 months, by selected student characteristics: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported being bullied at school during the previous 6 months, by gender and selected student characteristics: 1999 Percentage of public schools that reported one or more criminal incidents to police, by seriousness of the incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Number of public schools that reported one or more criminal incidents to police, by seriousness of the incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Number of criminal incidents occurring in public schools reported to police, by seriousness of the incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Number of criminal incidents reported to police per 1,000 public school students, by seriousness of the incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Percentage of public schools that reported one or more incidents of serious violent crime to police, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Percentage of public schools that reported one or more less serious violent or nonviolent criminal incidents to police, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Number of public schools that reported one or more incidents of serious violent crime to police, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Number of public schools that reported one or more less serious violent or nonviolent criminal incidents to police, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Number of serious violent criminal incidents occurring in public schools reported to police, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Number of less serious violent or nonviolent criminal incidents occurring in public schools reported to police, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Number of serious violent criminal incidents reported to police per 1,000 public school students, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Number of less serious violent or nonviolent criminal incidents reported to police per 1,000 public school students, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Number of nonfatal crimes against teachers and average annual number of crimes per 1,000 teachers at school, by type of crime and selected teacher characteristics: Aggregated from 1995 to 1999 Percentage and number of teachers who reported that they were threatened with injury or that they were physically attacked by a student during the past 12 months, by urbanicity and selected teacher and school characteristics: 1993-94 school year Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported carrying a weapon on school property at least 1 day in the past 30 days, by selected student characteristics: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported carrying a weapon anywhere at least 1 day in the past 30 days, by selected student characteristics: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported fearing being attacked or harmed at school or on the way to and from school during the previous 6 months, by selected student characteristics: 1989, 1995, and 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported that they avoided one or more places in school during the previous 6 months, by selected student characteristics: 1989, 1995, and 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported being targets of hate-related words or who saw hate-related graffiti at school during the previous 6 months, by selected student characteristics: 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported that street gangs were present at school during the previous 6 months, by selected student characteristics: 1989, 1995, and 1999 Percentage and number of public schools that reported that 1 or more of 17 discipline issues was a serious problem in their school, by urbanicity and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported using alcohol in the last 30 days, by selected student characteristics: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported using marijuana in the last 30 days, by selected student characteristics: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported that drugs were made available to them on school property during the last 12 months, by selected student characteristics: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Standard Error Tables Standard errors for table 2.1: Number of nonfatal crimes against students ages 12 through 18 occurring at school or on the way to or from school, by type of crime and selected student characteristics: 1992 to 1999 Standard errors for table 2.2: Number of nonfatal crimes against students ages 12 through 18 occurring at school or on the way to or from school per 1,000 students, by type of crime and selected student characteristics: 1992 to 1999 Standard errors for table 2.3: Number of nonfatal crimes against students ages 12 through 18 occurring away from school, by type of crime and selected student characteristics: 1992 to 1999 Standard errors for table 2.4: Number of nonfatal crimes against students ages 12 through 18 occurring away from school per 1,000 students, by type of crime and selected student characteristics: 1992 to 1999 Standard errors for table 3.1: Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported criminal victimization at school during the previous 6 months, by type of victimization and selected student characteristics: 1995 and 1999 Standard errors for table 4.1: Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported being threatened or injured with a weapon on school property during the last 12 months, by selected student characteristics: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Standard errors for table 5.1: Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported having been in a physical fight in the last 12 months, by selected student characteristics: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Standard errors for table 6.1: Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported being bullied at school during the previous 6 months, by gender and selected student characteristics: 1999 Standard errors for table 7.1: Percentage of public schools that reported one or more criminal incidents to police, by seriousness of the incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table 7.2: Number of public schools that reported one or more criminal incidents to police, by seriousness of the incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table 7.3: Number of criminal incidents occurring in public schools reported to police, by seriousness of the incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table 7.4: Number of criminal incidents reported to police per 1,000 public school students, by seriousness of the incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table 8.1: Percentage of public schools that reported one or more incidents of serious violent crime to police, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table 8.2: Percentage of public schools that reported one or more less serious violent or nonviolent criminal incidents to police, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table 8.3: Number of public schools that reported one or more incidents of serious violent crime to police, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table 8.4: Number of public schools that reported one or more less serious violent or nonviolent criminal incidents to police, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table 8.5: Number of serious violent criminal incidents occurring in public schools reported to police, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table 8.6: Number of less serious violent or nonviolent criminal incidents occurring in public schools reported to police, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table 8.7: Number of serious violent criminal incidents reported to police per 1,000 public school students, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table 8.8: Number of less serious violent or nonviolent criminal incidents reported to police per 1,000 public school students, by type of incident, urbanicity, and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table 9.1: Number of nonfatal crimes against teachers and average annual number of crimes per 1,000 teachers at school, by type of crime and selected teacher characteristics: Aggregated from 1995 to 1999 Standard errors for table 10.1: Percentage and number of teachers who reported that they were threatened with injury or that they were physically attacked by a student during the past 12 months, by urbanicity and selected teacher and school characteristics: 1993-94 school year Standard errors for table 11.1: Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported carrying a weapon on school property at least 1 day in the past 30 days, by selected student characteristics: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Standard errors for table 11.2: Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported carrying a weapon anywhere at least 1 day in the past 30 days, by selected student characteristics: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Standard errors for table 12.1: Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported fearing being attacked or harmed at school or on the way to and from school during the previous 6 months, by selected student characteristics: 1989, 1995, and 1999 Standard errors for table 13.1: Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported that they avoided one or more places in school during the previous 6 months, by selected student characteristics: 1989, 1995, and 1999 Standard errors for table 14.1: Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported being targets of hate-related words or who saw hate-related graffiti at school during the previous 6 months, by selected student characteristics: 1999 Standard errors for table 15.1: Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported that street gangs were present at school during the previous 6 months, by selected student characteristics: 1989, 1995, and 1999 Standard errors for table 16.1: Percentage and number of public schools that reported that 1 or more of 17 discipline issues was a serious problem in their school, by urbanicity and selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table 17.1: Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported using alcohol in the last 30 days, by selected student characteristics: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Standard errors for table 18.1: Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported using marijuana in the last 30 days, by selected student characteristics: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Standard errors for table 19.1: Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported that drugs were made available to them on school property during the last 12 months, by selected student characteristics: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Appendix Tables Percentage of public schools that reported that they have a zero tolerance policy for various specified student offenses, by selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Percentage of public schools that reported that students were required to wear school uniforms, by selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Percentage of public schools that reported that they use various types of security measures at their schools, by selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Percentage of public schools that reported various levels of police or other law enforcement representatives' presence during a typical week, by selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Percentage of public schools that reported formal school violence prevention or reduction programs or efforts, by selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Number and percentage of schools in which specified disciplinary actions were taken against students, total number of actions taken, and percentage of specific disciplinary actions taken against students, by type of infraction: 1996-97 Standard errors for table A1: Percentage of public schools that reported that they have a zero tolerance policy for various specified student offenses, by selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table A2: Percentage of public schools that reported that students were required to wear school uniforms, by selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table A3: Percentage of public schools that reported that they use various types of security measures at their schools, by selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table A4: Percentage of public schools that reported various levels of police or other law enforcement representatives' presence during a typical week, by selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table A5: Percentage of public schools that reported formal school violence prevention or reduction programs or efforts, by selected school characteristics: 1996-97 Standard errors for table A6: Number and percentage of schools in which specified disciplinary actions were taken against students, total number of actions taken, and percentage of specific disciplinary actions taken against students, by type of infraction: 1996-97 Descriptions of data sources and samples used in the report Wording of survey questions used to construct indicators Methods used to calculate standard errors of statistics for different surveys LIST OF FIGURES Number of murders and suicides of students at school and of youth ages 5 through 19 away from school: 1998-99 Number of nonfatal crimes against students ages 12 through 18 per 1,000 students, by type of crime and location: 1992 to 1999 Number of nonfatal crimes against students ages 12 through 18 occurring at school or going to or from school per 1,000 students, by type of crime and selected student characteristics: 1999 Number of nonfatal crimes against students ages 12 through 18 occurring away from school per 1,000 students, by type of crime and selected student characteristics: 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported criminal victimization at school during the previous 6 months, by grade level: 1995 and 1999 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported being threatened or injured with a weapon on school property during the last 12 months, by gender: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported being threatened or injured with a weapon on school property during the last 12 months, by grade: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported having been in a physical fight in the last 12 months, by gender: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported having been in a physical fight in the last 12 months, by grade: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported being bullied at school during the previous 6 months, by grade level and gender: 1999 Percentage distribution of public schools according to types of crimes reported to police: 1996-97 Percentage of public schools that reported one or more criminal incidents to police and number of incidents reported per 1,000 students, by seriousness of crimes, instructional level, and urbanicity: 1996- 97 Percentage of public schools that reported one or more criminal incidents to police, by type of crime and instructional level: 1996-97 Number of crimes per 1,000 public school students, by type of crime, instructional level, and urbanicity: 1996-97 Average annual number of nonfatal crimes against teachers at school per 1,000 teachers, by type of crime and selected characteristics: Aggregated from 1995 to 1999 Percentage of teachers who reported that they were threatened with injury or that they were physically attacked by a student from school during the past 12 months, by urbanicity and control: 1993-94 school year Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported carrying a weapon at least 1 day in the past 30 days, by gender: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported carrying a weapon at least 1 day in the past 30 days, by grade: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported fearing being attacked or harmed at school during the previous 6 months, by race/ethnicity: 1989, 1995, and 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported fearing being attacked or harmed on the way to and from school during the previous 6 months, by race/ethnicity: 1989, 1995, and 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported that they avoided one or more places in school during the previous 6 months, by race/ethnicity: 1989, 1995, and 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported that they avoided one or more places in school during the previous 6 months, by urbanicity: 1989, 1995, and 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported being targets of hate-related words or who saw hate-related graffiti at school during the previous 6 months, by gender and race/ethnicity: 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported that street gangs were present at school during the previous 6 months, by control of school: 1989, 1995, and 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported that street gangs were present at school during the previous 6 months, by urbanicity: 1989, 1995, and 1999 Percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported that street gangs were present at school during the previous 6 months, by race/ethnicity: 1989, 1995, and 1999 Percentage of public schools that reported that 1 or more of 17 discipline issues was a serious problem in their school, by instructional level and urbanicity: 1996-97 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported using alcohol in the last 30 days, by gender: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported using alcohol in the last 30 days, by grade: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported using marijuana in the last 30 days, by gender: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported using marijuana in the last 30 days, by grade: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported that drugs were made available to them on school property during the last 12 months, by gender: 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 Percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported that drugs were made available to them on school property during the last 12 months, by race/ethnicity: 1999 VIOLENT DEATHS AT SCHOOL Violent deaths at school and away from school**Note: This indicator has been updated 1999 data.** Violent deaths are tragic events that affect not only the individuals and their families directly involved but also everyone in the schools where they occur. Violent deaths at school receive national attention; accurate data on the magnitude of this problem are important. * From July 1, 1998 through June 30, 1999, there were 47 school-associated violent deaths in the United States. ***Footnote 1: See glossary for definition of school-associated violent deaths.*** Thirty-eight of these violent deaths were homicides, six were suicides, two were killed by a law enforcement officer in the line of duty, and one was unintentional. * Thirty-three of the 38 school-associated homicides were of school-aged children. There were a total of 2,407 homicides of children ages 5 through 19 occurring from July 1, 1998 through June 30, 1999. * Four of the six school-associated suicides occurring between July 1, 1998 through June 30, 1999 were of school-aged children. There were a total of 1,854 suicides of children ages 5 through 19 occurring in the 1999 calendar year. NONFATAL STUDENT VICTIMIZATION- STUDENT REPORTS Victimization of students at school and away from school**Note: This indicator has been updated to include 1999 data.** The amount of crime committed in the nation's schools continues to be a concern. Even though crime has decreased in recent years, theft and violence at school and while going to and from school still can lead to disruptive and threatening environments, reducing student performance. * Students ages 12 through 18 experienced fewer nonfatal serious violent crimes (that is, rape, sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault) when they were at school than away from school.***Footnote 2: "Students" refers to persons 12 though 18 years of age who have attended any grade equal to or less than high school. An uncertain percentage of these persons may not have attended school during the survey reference period.*** In 1999, students in this age group were victims of about 186,000 such crimes at school, and about 476,000 away from school. The victimization rate for serious violent crime at school and away from school generally declined from 1992 to 1999. * Students ages 12 through 18 were victims of about 880,000 nonfatal violent crimes (that is, serious violent crime plus simple assault) at school, and about 1.1 million away from school in 1999. There was a general decline in the violent victimization rate between 1992 and 1999 at school as well as away from school (from 48 to 33 and from 71 to 39 per 1,000 students ages 12 through 18, respectively). For each year from 1992 through 1997, the victimization rates for nonfatal violent crime were lower at school than away from school but these rates were similar in 1998 and 1999.***Footnote 3: These data do not take into account the number of hours that students spend at school and the number of hours they spend away from school.*** * Students were more likely to be victims of theft at school than away from school for most years between 1992 and 1999. In 1999, about 1.6 million thefts occurred at school (64 percent of all crimes at school), and about 1.0 million occurred away from school (50 percent of all crimes away from school). The victimization rate declined for thefts at school between 1992 and 1999 as it did for thefts away from school during this period. * Considering nonfatal crime (theft plus violent crime), students were victims of about 2.5 million crimes while they were at school in 1999, and about 2.1 million away from school. These represent victimization rates of 92 crimes per 1,000 students at school, and 78 crimes per 1,000 students away from school. * In 1999, the rates for serious violent crimes were about the same for males and females at school, but higher for males than females away from school. In the same year, rates of theft were similar for males and females both at school and away from school. * In 1999, students living in urban and suburban areas experienced serious violent crime at school at similar rates. Away from school, urban students were more vulnerable to serious violent crime than were suburban students, and suburban students were more likely to experience serious violent victimization than were rural students. However, student vulnerability to theft in 1999 was similar in urban, suburban, and rural areas both at and away from school. * Younger students (ages 12 through 14) were victimized at a higher rate than older students (ages 15 through 18) at school. However, older students were more likely than younger students to be victimized away from school. Prevalence of students being victimized at school**Note: This indicator repeats information from the 2000 Indicators of School Crime and Safety report.** Some of the crimes committed against students involve violence, while others involve their property. Presenting information on the prevalence of victimization for students helps clarify what percentage of students are affected by different types of crime. * In 1999, a smaller percentage of students ages 12 through 18 reported being victims of nonfatal crimes (including either theft or violent crimes) at school during the previous 6 months than in 1995 (10 percent and 8 percent, respectively). About 7 percent in 1995 were victims of theft compared with 6 percent in 1999. Also, 3 percent of students in 1995 reported being victims of violence at school compared with 2 percent in 1999. * The decline in the prevalence of victimization between 1995 and 1999 was due in part to a decline for students in grades 7 through 9. Between 1995 and 1999, the prevalence of reported victimization dropped from 11 percent to 8 percent for 7th graders, from 11 percent to 8 percent for 8th graders, and from 12 percent to 9 percent for 9th graders. During the same period, the prevalence of victimization remained relatively constant for 6th, 10th, 11th, and 12th graders. * In both 1995 and 1999, public school students were more likely to report having been victims of violent crime during the previous 6 months than were private school students. Public school students were also more likely than private school students to report being victims of theft at school in 1995, but equally likely to experience theft in 1999. Prevalence of students being threatened or injured with a weapon on school property**Note: This indicator has been undated to include 1999 data.** Every year, some students are threatened or injured with a weapon while they are on school property. The percentages of students victimized in this way provide an important measure of how safe our schools are and how this is changing over time. * The percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who were threatened or injured with a weapon on school property in the 12 months before the survey has remained constant in recent years. In 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999, about 7 to 8 percent of students reported being threatened or injured with a weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school property. * In each survey year, males were more likely than females to report being threatened or injured with a weapon on school property. For example, in 1999, 10 percent of males reported being threatened or injured in the past year, compared with 6 percent of females. * Of 9th through 12th grade students, those students in lower grades were more likely to be threatened or injured with a weapon on school property than were students in higher grades in all survey years. * There were no racial/ethnic differences in the percentages of students being threatened or injured with a weapon on school property in 1999.*** Footnote 4: While there appear to be large differences among racial/ethnic groups, these differences are associated with large standard errors and are not statistically significant.*** Prevalence of students involved in physical fights on school property**Note: This indicator has been unpdated to include 1999 data.** Schools where there are numerous physical fights may not be able to maintain a focused learning environment. Students who are constantly involved in fights on school property cannot be ready to learn. * In all years, students were more likely to report being in a fight anywhere ***Footnote 5: The term "anywhere" is not used in the YRBS questionnaire. Rather, students are simply asked how many times in the last 12 months they had been in a physical fight.*** than to report being in a fight on school property in the last 12 months. In 1999, 36 percent of students in grades 9 through 12 reported that they had been in a physical fight anywhere. In that same year, about 14 percent of all students said that they had been in a physical fight on school property. * The percentage of students who reported being in a fight anywhere declined from 1993 to 1999-from 42 percent in 1993 to 36 percent in 1999. Similarly, the percentages of students who reported fighting on school property for these years also declined, from 16 percent in 1993 to 14 percent in 1999. * In all survey years, males were more likely than females to have been in a fight anywhere and on school property. In 1999, 44 percent of males said they had been in a fight anywhere, and 19 percent said they had been in a fight on school property. In that same year, about 27 percent of females reported they had been in a fight anywhere, and 10 percent said they had been in a fight on school property. * Of 9th through 12th grade students, those in lower grades reported being in more fights than students in higher grades anywhere and on school property in all survey years. * In 1999, Asian students were less likely than students from other racial/ethnic back- grounds to report being in a fight anywhere (23 percent for Asian students compared to 33 to 51 percents for all other students). In addition, they were less likely to report being in a fight on school property than black or African American, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and Hispanic or Latino students (10 percent compared to 19, 25, and 16 percent, respectively). Prevalence of students being bullied at school**Note: This indicator repeats information from the 2000 Indicators of School Crime and Safety report.** Bullying contributes to a climate of fear and intimidation in schools. Students ages 12 through 18 were asked if they had been bullied (that is, picked on or made to do things they did not want to do) at school. * In 1999, about 5 percent of students ages 12 through 18 reported that they had been bullied at school in the last 6 months. In general, females were as likely as males to report being bullied. * Males were more likely to be bullied in grades 6 and 7 than were females (12 percent versus 7 percent respectively), while there was little difference in the percentage of males and females being bullied in the other two grade levels. * There were few differences among racial/ ethnic groups in the percentage of students who reported being bullied. The exception was that white and black students were more likely to report being victimized by bullies than were students of other, non-Hispanic origin. About 2 percent in this group, which includes Asians, Pacific Islanders, American Indians, and Alaskan Natives, reported being bullied, compared with about 5 percent of white and 6 percent of black students. * Students in lower grades were more likely to be bullied than students in higher grades. About 10 percent of students in grades 6 and 7 reported being bullied, compared with about 5 percent of students in grades 8 and 9 and about 2 percent in grades 10 through 12. VIOLENCE AND CRIME AT SCHOOL-- PUBLIC SCHOOL PRINCIPAL/DISCIPLINARIAN REPORTS Crimes reported to the police**Note: This indicator repeats information from the 2000 Indicators of School Crime and Safety report.** The number of crimes that principals indicated they reported to police or other law enforcement representatives is a useful measure of the occurrences of serious crimes in the nation's schools. The percentage of schools reporting crimes provides an indication of how widespread crime is, while the number of crimes reported provides information on the magnitude of the problem. * In 1996-97, 10 percent of all public schools reported at least one serious violent crime to a law enforcement representative. Another 47 percent of public schools reported a less serious violent or nonviolent crime (but not a serious violent one). The remaining 43 percent of public schools did not report any of these crimes to the police. * The vast majority of crimes reported by public schools were of the less serious violent or nonviolent type in 1996-97 (402,000 out of the 424,000 total crimes reported to the police). * The percentage of schools reporting crimes was similar at the middle and high school levels. At each level, about 20 percent of the schools reported at least one serious violent crime, and about 55 percent reported at least one less serious violent or nonviolent crime, but no serious violent crime in 1996-97. * The numbers of reported incidents per 1,000 students were similar for middle and high schools for both serious violent and less serious violent and nonviolent crimes . For both types of crimes, there was a lower rate at the elementary level than at the middle or high school levels. * The percentage of schools reporting at least one serious violent crime was much higher in cities (17 percent) than in towns (5 percent) or rural areas (8 percent) during 1996-97. Specific crimes reported to the police**Note: This indicator repeats information from the 2000 Indicators of School Crime and Safety report.** Data on the prevalence of specific types of crimes add detail to the more general discussion of serious violent crimes and less serious violent and nonviolent crimes. Each type of crime affects students and schools differently. * About one-half (44 to 55 percent) of all public middle and high schools reported incidents of vandalism, theft or larceny, and physical attacks or fights without weapons to the police or other law enforcement representatives in the 1996-97 school year. Considerably smaller percentages of public middle and high schools reported the more serious violent crimes of rape or other type of sexual battery (5 and 8 percent, respectively); robbery (5 and 8 percent); or physical attack or fight with a weapon (12 and 13 percent). * Elementary schools were much less likely than either middle or high schools to report any of the types of crime described here in 1996-97 . They were much more likely to report vandalism (31 percent) than any other crime (19 percent or less). * In 1996-97, physical attack or fight without a weapon was generally the most commonly reported crime at the middle and high school levels (9 and 8 per 1,000 public school students, respectively). Theft or larceny was more common at the high school than the middle school level (6 versus 4 per 1,000 students). * Overall, there was relatively little variation by urbanicity in the crime rates at school discussed here during the 1996-97 school year (as measured by the number of crimes reported per 1,000 public school students) . NONFATAL TEACHER VICTIMIZATION AT SCHOOL-- TEACHER REPORTS Nonfatal teacher victimization at school**Note: This indicator has been updated to include 1999 data.** Students are not the only ones who are victims of crime at school. Teachers in school can also be the targets of violence and theft. In addition to the personal toll such violence takes on teachers, those who worry about their safety may have difficulty teaching and may leave the profession altogether. Information on the number of crimes against teachers at school can help show how severe and widespread the problem is. * Over the 5-year period from 1995 through 1999, teachers were the victims of approximately 1,708,000 nonfatal crimes at school, including 1,073,000 thefts and 635,000 violent crimes (rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault). On average, this translates into 342,000 nonfatal crimes per year, or 79 crimes per 1,000 teachers per year. Among the violent crimes against teachers during this 5- year period, there were about 69,000 serious violent crimes (11 percent of the violent crimes), including rape or sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault. On average, this translates into 14,000 serious violent crimes per year. * During the 1995-99 period, the average annual rate of serious violent crime was similar for teachers (on average, 3 per 1,000 teachers), regardless of their instructional level, gender, race/ethnicity, and the urbanicity of the schools where they taught.***Footnote 6: The average annual rate is the sum of all teacher victimizations across five years divided by the sum of all teachers over those five years.*** * During the 1995-99 period, senior high school and middle/junior high school teachers were more likely to be victims of violent crimes (most of which were simple assaults) than elementary school teachers (38 and 54, respectively, versus 16 crimes per 1,000 teachers). * During the 1995-99 period, senior high school and middle/junior high school teachers were more likely to experience theft at school than elementary school teachers (61 and 66, respectively, versus 38 thefts per 1,000 teachers). * The average annual violent crime rate for teachers at school varied by gender. Over the 5-year period from 1995 through 1999, male teachers were more likely to be victims of violent crimes than female teachers (51 versus 22 crimes per 1,000 teachers). * Teachers were differentially victimized by violent crimes at school according to where they taught. For example, over the 5- year period from 1995 through 1999, urban teachers were more likely to be victims of violent crimes than suburban and rural teachers (39 versus 22 and 20, respectively, per 1,000 teachers). Teachers in urban areas were more likely to experience theft at school than those in rural areas (58 and 34 respectively, per 1,000 teachers) but no more likely than suburban teachers. Prevalence of teachers being threatened with injury or attacked by students**Note: This indicator repeats information from the 2000 Indicators of School Crime and Safety report.** Some of the offenses against teachers are committed by students. Data on physical attacks and threats against elementary and secondary teachers by students can provide a snapshot of the prevalence of this problem. * In the 1993-94 school year, 12 percent of all elementary and secondary school teachers (341,000) were threatened with injury by a student from their school, and 4 percent (119,000) were physically attacked by a student. * Teachers in central city schools were more likely to be victims than were teachers in urban fringe or rural schools in 1993-94. About 15 percent of teachers in central city schools had been threatened with injury by students, compared with 11 and 10 percent of teachers in urban fringe and rural schools. About 6 percent of teachers in central city schools had been attacked by students, compared with 4 and 3 percent of teachers in urban fringe and rural schools. * Public school teachers were more likely than private school teachers to be victi- mized by students in school in 1993-94. Almost 13 percent of public school teachers had been threatened with injury by students, compared with 4 percent of private school teachers, and 4 percent of public school teachers had been physically attacked by students, compared with 2 percent of private school teachers. Teachers in public central city schools were about five times more likely to be targets of threats of injury and about three times more likely to be targets of attacks than their colleagues in private central city schools. * In 1993-94, secondary school teachers were more likely than elementary school teachers to have been threatened with injury by a student from their school (15 percent versus 9 percent). However, elementary school teachers were more likely than secondary school teachers to have been physically attacked by a student (5 percent versus 3 percent). The prevalence of teacher victimization by students did not vary according to the racial/ethnic backgrounds of teachers. SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT Prevalence of students carrying weapons on school property**Note: This indicator has been uupdated to include 1999 data.** The presence of weapons at school can create an intimidating and threatening atmosphere, making teaching and learning difficult. The percentages of students who report that they carry a gun or other weapon on school property is an indicator of the breadth of the problem of weapons at school. * In every survey year, more students reported carrying a weapon anywhere ***Footnote 7: This indicator repeats information from the 2000 Indicators of School Crime and Safety report.*** than reported carrying a weapon on school property in the past 30 days. In 1999, 17 percent of students in grades 9 through 12 reported carrying a weapon such as a gun, knife, or club anywhere. About 7 percent reported they had carried a weapon on school property. * Between 1993 and 1999, the percentage of students who reported carrying a weapon anywhere fell from 22 percent to 17 percent. There was also a decline in the percentage of students who carried a weapon at school-from 12 percent in 1993 to 7 percent in 1999 (about a 42 percent reduction). * In all years, males were approximately between four and five times more likely than females to carry a weapon anywhere and between three and four times more likely to carry a weapon on school property. For example, in 1999, 11 percent of males carried a weapon on school property, compared with 3 percent of females. * Students in lower grades were generally more likely to have carried a weapon anywhere than were students in higher grades in all survey years except 1999. However, at school, students in all grades were equally likely to carry a weapon in all survey years, except 1995. * There were few racial/ethnic differences in the percentages of students carrying weapons anywhere and on school property. ***Footnote 8: While there appear to be large differences among racial/ethnic groups, these differences are associated with large standard errors and are not statistically significant.*** Students' perceptions of personal safety at school and when traveling to and from school**Note: This indicator repeats information from the 2000 Indicators of School Crime and Safety report. Comparisons between the 1989 data and the 1995 and 1999 data should be made with caution due to changes in the questionnaire. See appendix B for details.** One consequence of school violence is the fear that it can instill in students. Students who fear for their own safety may not be able or ready to learn. Concerns about vulnerability to attacks by others at school and on the way to and from school may also have a detrimental effect on the school environment and learning. * Between 1995 and 1999, there were decreases in the percentages of students feeling unsafe while they were at school and while they were going to and from school. In 1995, 9 percent of students ages 12 through 18 sometimes or most of the time feared they were going to be attacked or harmed at school, while in 1999 this percentage fell to 5 percent. Between these years, the percentage of students fearing they would be attacked while traveling to and from school fell from 7 percent to 4 percent. * Between 1995 and 1999, there was a decline in fear of attacks at school and when traveling to and from school among all racial/ethnic groups. However, in both years, larger percentages of black and Hispanic students than white students feared such attacks. * In both 1995 and 1999, students in lower grades were more likely to fear for their safety at school than were students in higher grades. For example, in 1999, 9 percent of students in grade 6 feared for their safety while at school, compared with 3 percent of students in grade 12. * Between 1995 and 1999 there was a decline in fear of attacks at school and to and from school within almost all grades. However, in both 1995 and 1999, students in lower grades were also more likely than students in higher grades to fear being attacked on the way to and from school. * Between 1995 and 1999 there was a decline in fear of attacks at school and to and from school for students in all areas-urban, suburban and rural. However, in 1999, as in 1995, students in urban schools were more likely than students in suburban or rural schools to fear being attacked at school and when travelling to and from school. Students' reports of avoiding places in school**Note: This indicator repeats information from the 2000 Indicators of School Crime and Safety report. Comparisons between the 1989 data and the 1995 and 1999 data should be made with caution due to changes in the questionnaire. See appendix B for details.** One consequence of crime in school is that students begin to perceive specific areas in school as unsafe. In trying to ensure their own safety, they begin to avoid these areas. Changes in the percentage of students avoiding areas in school may be a good barometer of how safe schools are--at least in the minds of those who attend these schools. * Between 1995 and 1999, there was a decrease in the percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who avoided one or more places in school- from 9 percent in 1995 to 5 percent in 1999. Despite this decline, this percentage still represented 1.1 million students in 1999 who reported avoiding some areas in school out of fear for their own safety. * The percentage of students of all racial/ ethnic groups avoiding specific areas in school fell between 1995 and 1999. In both 1995 and 1999, black and Hispanic students were more likely to avoid areas in school than were white students. * Between 1995 and 1999, there was a decrease in the percentage of students reporting avoiding areas in school among students of almost all grade levels. However, in both years, students in lower grades were more likely than students in higher grades to report avoiding areas in school. * While in 1995, students in urban areas were more likely than suburban students to avoid areas in school (12 percent versus 8 percent, respectively), by 1999 urban and suburban students were equally as likely to avoid areas in school. Students' reports of being called hate- related words and seeing hate-related graffiti**Note: This indicator repeats information from the 2000 Indicators of School Crime and Safety report.** A student's exposure to hate-related words or symbols at school can increase his or her feeling of vulnerability. An environment in which students are confronted with discriminatory behavior is not conducive to learning and creates a climate of hostility. * In 1999, about 13 percent of students ages 12 through 18 reported that someone at school had used hate-related words against them. That is, in the prior 6 months someone at school called them a derogatory word having to do with race/ethnicity, religion, disability, gender, or sexual orientation. In addition, about 36 percent of students saw hate-related graffiti at school. * There was very little variation in these percentages based on the location of the students' households. Students in urban, suburban, and rural households were equally as likely to report being called hate-related words and to see hate-related graffiti. * Females were more likely than males to report being targets of derogatory words and were also more likely to report seeing hate- related graffiti at their school. About 14 percent of females reported being called hate words in 1999, compared with 12 percent of males. About 39 percent of females had seen hate-related graffiti, compared with 34 percent of males. * Black students were more likely than white or Hispanic students to report being called hate words. About 17 percent of black students ages 12 through 18 reported being targets of derogatory words, compared with 13 percent of white students and 12 percent of Hispanic students.***Footnote 9: The percentage of other, non-Hispanic students who were victimized by hate-related words was similar to that for white, non-Hispanic, black, non-Hispanic, and Hispanic students. Students of all racial/ ethnic groups were equally likely to report hate-related graffiti at school. Students' reports of gangs at school**Note: This indicator repeats information from the 2000 Indicators of School Crime and Safety report. Comparisons between the 1989 data and the 1995 and 1999 data should be made with caution due to changes in the questionnaire. See appendix B for details.** Street gangs are organized groups that are often involved in drugs, weapons trafficking, and violence. The presence of street gangs in school can be very disruptive to the school environment. Street gangs may not only create fear among students but also increase the level of violence in school. The percentage of students who report the presence of street gangs in their schools indicates the existence and severity of the gang problem in schools. * Between 1995 and 1999, the percentage of students who reported that street gangs were present at their schools decreased. In 1995, 29 percent of students reported street gangs being present in their schools. By 1999, this percentage had fallen to 17 percent. * Gangs were more likely to be reported in public schools than in private schools. In 1999, 19 percent of students in public schools reported that street gangs were present in their schools, compared with 4 percent in private schools. A similar pattern of results was reported in 1995. However, between these two years, the percentage of public school students reporting that gangs were present in their schools decreased by about 40 percent (from 31 percent in 1995 to 19 percent in 1999) as did the percentage of private school students reporting gang presence (from 7 percent to 4 percent). * In 1999, urban students were more likely to report that there were street gangs at their schools (25 percent) than were suburban and rural students (16 percent and 11 percent, respectively). Between 1995 and 1999, reports of gang presence decreased regardless of students' place of residence. * In both years, Hispanic and black students were more likely than white students to report the existence of street gangs in their schools. In 1995, Hispanic students were more likely than black students to do so, while in 1999 they were equally as likely. Between 1995 and 1999, reports of gang presence decreased for whites, blacks, Hispanics, and students of other race/ethnicities. Public school principals' reports of discipline problems at school**Note: This indicator repeats information from the 2000 Indicators of School Crime and Safety report.** Discipline problems in a school may contribute to an overall climate in which violence may occur. Schools that suffer from student drug or alcohol use, racial tensions, or verbal and physical abuse of teachers may be filled with pressures that result in school violence. * During the 1996-97 school year, 16 percent of all public school principals reported that one or more discipline issues had been a serious problem in their school.***Footnote l0: These issues were student tardiness, student absenteeism/class cutting, physical conflicts among students, robbery or theft of items worth over $10, vandalism of school property, student alcohol use, student drug use, sale of drugs on school grounds, student tobacco use, student possession of weapons, trespassing, verbal abuse of teachers, physical abuse of teachers, teacher absenteeism, teacher alcohol or drug use, racial tensions, and gangs.*** About the same percentage of principals in city, urban fringe, town, and rural settings reported one or more serious discipline problems. * Public elementary schools were the least likely to report any serious discipline issues, followed by middle schools and then high schools. About 8 percent of elementary school principals reported one or more of these issues as a serious problem, while 18 percent of principals in middle schools and 37 percent of those in high schools did so. * While overall there were no significant differences in reported serious problems by urbanicity, a greater percentage of principals in public city high schools than in rural high schools reported having serious discipline problems -- 47 percent compared with 28 percent. Prevalence of students using alcohol**Note: This indicator has been updated to include 1999 data.** The consumption of alcohol by students on school property, a crime in itself, may also lead to other crimes and misbehavior. It can lead to a school environment that is harmful to students, teachers, and staff. * In 1999, 50 percent of students in grades 9 through 12 had at least one drink of alcohol anywhere ***Footnote 11: The term "anywhere" is not used in the YRBS questionnaire. Rather, students are simply asked during the past 30 days, on how many days did they have at least one drink of alcohol.*** in the 30 days before being surveyed. A much smaller percentage (5 percent) had at least one drink on school property during the same period. * Approximately the same percentage of students had consumed alcohol in 1999 as in 1993, 1995, and 1997-both anywhere and on school property. * In every survey year except for 1995, males were more likely than females to have used alcohol anywhere. Furthermore, in every survey year, males were more likely than females to use alcohol on school property. For example, in 1999, 6 percent of males had used alcohol on school property compared with 4 percent of females. * In every survey year, students in higher grades were more likely to report drinking alcohol anywhere than were students in lower grades. However, in every survey year, students in all grades were equally likely to report drinking alcohol on school property. * Asian students were less likely to use alcohol anywhere than students of any other racial/ethnic background in 1999 (26 percent for Asian students compared to 40 to 61 percent for all other students). They also were less likely to report using alcohol on school property than black or African American, white, and Hispanic or Latino students (2 percent compared to 4, 5, and 7 percent, respectively). Prevalence of students using marijuana**Note: This indicator has been updated to include 1999 data.** The use of drugs at school may cause disruptions in the learning environment. The consumption of these substances, such as marijuana, can lead to a school environment that is harmful to students, teachers, and school administrators. * In all years, a greater number of students in grades 9 through 12 reported using marijuana anywhere***Footnote 12: The term "anywhere" is not used in the YRBS questionnaire. Rather, students are simply asked how many times during the past 30 days they used marijuana.*** than reported using marijuana on school property during the last 30 days. In 1999, 27 percent of students reported using marijuana anywhere whereas 7 percent of students reported using marijuana on school property. * There was an increase in students' use of marijuana anywhere and on school property between 1993 and 1995. In both 1997 and 1999, the percentage of students using marijuana anywhere and on school property were similar to the percentage in 1995. * Males were more likely than females to have used marijuana in every survey year both anywhere and on school property. * In 1993, 1995, and 1999, students in lower grades were generally less likely than students in higher grades to report using marijuana anywhere. In 1997, this difference was not apparent, with students in lower grades about as likely to report using marijuana anywhere as students in higher grades. Students' grade in school was not associated with their use of marijuana on school property. * In 1999, Asian students were less likely than students from other racial/ethnic backgrounds to report using marijuana anywhere. However, regarding marijuana use at school, there were generally no differences across racial/ethnic groups. Prevalence of students reporting drugs were made available to them on school property**Note: This indicator has been updated to include 1999 data.** Schools can be places where young people are offered or can purchase illegal drugs. The availability of drugs on school property is a disruptive and corrupting influence in the school environment. * In 1995, 1997, and 1999, between 30 and 32 percent of all students in grades 9 through 12 reported that someone had offered, sold, or given them an illegal drug on school property in the 12 months prior to the survey. This was an increase from 1993 when 24 percent of such students reported that illegal drugs were available to them on school property. * In each survey year, males were more likely than females to report that drugs were offered, sold, or given to them on school property. For example, in 1999, 35 percent of males reported the availability of drugs, while 26 percent of females did so. * Students' grade level in school did not appear to be associated with whether they had been offered, sold, or given drugs on school property. Generally, in each survey year, about the same percentage of students in each grade level reported the availability of illegal drugs. * In 1999, the racial/ethnic background of students was associated with their reports of having illegal drugs offered, sold, or given to them on school property. Specifically, Hispanic or Latino and Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander students were more likely than black or African American, white, and Asian students to report having drugs available to them on school property. APPENDIX A. SCHOOL PRACTICES AND POLICIES RELATED TO SAFETY AND DISCIPLINE**Note: This appendix repeats information from the 2000 Indicators of School Crime and Safety report.** Concern over school crime and violence has prompted many public schools to take various measures to reduce and prevent violence and ensure safety in schools. Such measures include adopting zero tolerance policies; requiring students to wear uniforms; employing various security measures such as requiring visitor sign-in and using metal detectors; having police or other law enforcement representatives stationed at the school; and offering students various types of violence prevention programs. Presented in this appendix are data on the implementation of such safety measures in public schools. This report does not evaluate the effectiveness of any of these efforts or strategies, and the inclusion of a strategy does not suggest that it is endorsed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) or the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) as an effective means of reducing or preventing violence. Likewise, the omission of a possible strategy does not suggest it is rejected by NCES or BJS as a policy to reduce or prevent violence. This information, along with supporting tables, was drawn from a recent NCES report titled Violence and Discipline Problems in U.S. Public Schools: 1996-97 (NCES 98-030). The report was based on data from the 1996-97 Fast Response Survey System (FRSS) Principal/ School Disciplinarian Survey on School Violence. Readers should consult that report for more detailed findings on variation by school characteristics. Zero Tolerance Policies * Most public schools reported having zero tolerance policies toward serious student offenses. A "zero tolerance policy" was defined as a school or district policy that mandates predetermined consequences or punishments for specific offenses. At least 9 out of 10 schools reported zero tolerance policies for firearms (94 percent) and weapons other than firearms (91 percent). Eighty-seven percent of schools had policies of zero tolerance for alcohol and 88 percent had zero tolerance policies for drugs. Most schools also had zero tolerance policies for violence and tobacco (79 percent each). School Uniforms * Requiring students to wear school uniforms was not common. Three percent of all public schools required students to wear uniforms during the 1996-97 school year. Security Measures * Schools took a number of measures to secure their schools. For example, 96 percent of public schools reported that visitors were required to sign in before entering the school building; 80 percent of public schools reported having a closed campus policy that prohibited most students from leaving the campus for lunch; 53 percent of public schools controlled access to their school building; and 24 percent of public schools controlled access to their school grounds. In addition, 19 percent of public schools reported conducting drug sweeps, with middle schools and high schools being more likely to use drug sweeps than elementary schools (36 and 45 percent, respectively, versus 5 percent). While 4 percent of public schools reported that they performed random metal detector checks on students, daily use of metal detectors as a security measure was not common: only 1 percent of public schools reported taking this measure. Presence of Police or Other Law Enforcement Representatives in Schools * In addition to the security measures described above, 6 percent of public schools reported having police or other law enforcement representatives stationed 30 hours or more at the school in a typical week during the 1996-97 school year; 1 percent of schools had them stationed from 10 to 29 hours; and 3 percent had them stationed from 1 to 9 hours. Twelve percent of schools did not have police or other law enforcement representatives stationed during a typical week but made them available as needed, and 78 percent of schools did not have any such persons stationed at their schools. Violence Prevention or Reduction Programs * A majority of public schools (78 percent) reported having some type of formal school violence prevention or reduction program. The percentage of schools with both 1-day and ongoing programs (43 percent) was higher than schools with only ongoing programs (24 percent) and schools with only 1-day programs (11 percent). Policies to Prevent Firearms in School * In the 1996-97 school year, there were over 5,000 student expulsions for possession or use of a firearm. An additional 3,300 students were transferred to alternative schools for possession or use of a firearm, while 8,144 were placed in out-of-school suspensions lasting 5 or more days. About 5 percent of all public schools (or 4,170) took one or more of these actions. APPENDIX B. TECHNICAL NOTES General Information The information presented in this report was obtained from many data sources, including databases from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). While some of the data were collected from universe surveys, most were gathered by sample surveys. Some questions from different surveys may appear the same, but they were actually asked of different populations of students (e.g., high school seniors or students in grades 9 through 12); in different years; about experiences that occurred within different periods of time (e.g., in the past 4 weeks or during the past 12 months); and at different locations (e.g., in school or at home). Readers of this report should take particular care when comparing data from the different data sources. Because of the variation in collection procedures, timing, phrasing of questions, and so forth, the results from the different sources may not be strictly comparable. After introducing the data sources used for this report, the next section discusses the accuracy of estimates and describes the statistical procedures used. Sources of Data Table B1 presents some key information for each of the data sets used in the report, including the survey year(s), target population, response rate, and sample size. The remainder of the section briefly describes each data set and provides directions for obtaining more information. The exact wording of the interview questions used to construct the indicators are presented in table B2. Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS) This report draws upon data on teacher victimization from the 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS:93-94), which provides national- and state-level data on public and private schools, principals, school districts, and teachers. The 1993- 94 survey was the third in a series of cross-sectional, school-focused surveys, following ones conducted in 1990-91 and 1987-88. It consisted of four sets of linked questionnaires, including surveys of schools, the principals of each selected school, a subsample of teachers within each school, and public school districts. Data were collected by multistage sampling. Stratified by state, control, type, association membership, and grade level (for private schools), schools were sampled first. Approximately 9,900 public schools and 3,300 private schools were selected to participate in the 1993-94 SASS. Within each school, teachers were further stratified into one of five teacher types in the following hierarchy: 1) Asian or Pacific Islander; 2) American Indian, Aleut, or Eskimo; 3) bilingual/ESL; 4) new teachers (those with 1 to 3 years of experience); and 5) experienced teachers (those with more than 3 years of experience). Within each teacher stratum, teachers were selected systematically with equal probability. Approximately 56,700 public school teachers and 11,500 private school teachers were sampled. This report focuses on teachers' responses. The overall weighted response rates were 84 percent for public school teachers and 73 percent for private school teachers. In the Public School Teacher Questionnaire, 91 percent of the items had a response rate of 90 percent or more, and in the Private School Teacher Questionnaire, 89 percent of the items had this level of response. Values were imputed for questionnaire items that should have been answered but were not. For additional information about SASS, refer to R. Abramson, C. Cole, S. Fondelier, B. Jackson, R. Parmer, and S. Kaufman, 1996, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey: Sample Design and Estimation (NCES 96-089), or contact: Kerry Gruber National Center for Education Statistics 1990 K Street NW Washington, DC 20006 Telephone: (202) 502-7349 E-mail: Kerry.Gruber@ed.gov National School-Based Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) The National School-Based Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) is one component of the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS), an epidemiological surveillance system developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to monitor the prevalence of youth behaviors that most influence health. The YRBS focuses on priority health-risk behaviors established during youth that result in the most significant mortality, morbidity, disability, and social problems during both youth and adulthood. This report uses 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 YRBS data. The YRBS used a three-stage cluster sampling design to produce a nationally representative sample of students in grades 9 through 12 in the United States. The target population consisted of all public and private school students in grades 9 through 12 in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The first-stage sampling frame included selecting primary sampling units (PSUs) from strata formed on the basis of urbanization and the relative percentage of black and Hispanic students in the PSU. These PSUs are either large counties or groups of smaller, adjacent counties. At the second stage, schools were selected with probability proportional to school enrollment size. Schools with substantial numbers of black and Hispanic students were sampled at relatively higher rates than all other schools. The final stage of sampling consisted of randomly selecting within each chosen school at each grade 9 through 12 one or two intact classes of a required subject, such as English or social studies. All students in selected classes were eligible to participate. Approximately 16,300, 10,900, 16,300, and 15,300 students were selected to participate in the 1993, 1995, 1997, and 1999 surveys, respectively. The overall response rate was 70 percent for the 1993 survey, 60 percent for the 1995 survey, 69 percent for the 1997 survey, and 66 percent for the 1999 survey. NCES standards call for response rates of 70 percent or better and bias analyses are called for by NCES when that percentage is not achieved. For the YRBS data, a full nonresponse bias analysis has not been done to date. The weights were developed to adjust for nonresponse and the oversampling of black and Hispanic students in the sample. The final weights were normalized so that only weighted proportions of students (not weighted counts of students) in each grade matched national population projections. In 1999, in accordance with changes to the Office of Management and Budget's standards for the classification of federal data on race and ethnicity, the YRBS item on race/ethnicity was modified. The version of the race and ethnicity question used in 1993, 1995, and 1997 was: How do you describe yourself? White - not Hispanic Black - not Hispanic Hispanic or Latino Asian or Pacific Islander American Indian or Alaskan Native Other The version used in 1999 was: How do you describe yourself? (Select one or more responses.) A. American Indian or Alaska Native B. Asian C. Black or African American D. Hispanic or Latino E. Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander F. White This new version of the question used in 1999 results in the possibility of respondents marking more than one category. While more accurately reflecting respondents' racial and ethnic identity, the new item cannot be directly compared to responses to the old item. Thus, comparisons of responses by race/ ethnicity between the 1999 YRBS and prior years' YRBS are not advisable. For additional information about the YRBS, contact: Laura Kann Division of Adolescent and School Health National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Mailstop K-33 4770 Buford Highway NE Atlanta, GA 30341 Telephone: (404) 488-5330 E-mail: lkk1@cdc.gov Fast Response Survey System: Principal/School Disciplinarian Survey on School Violence The Principal/School Disciplinarian Survey was conducted through the NCES Fast Response Survey System (FRSS) during the spring and summer of 1997. The FRSS is a survey system designed to collect small amounts of issue- oriented data with minimal burden on respondents and within a relatively short time frame. The FRSS Principal/School Disciplinarian Survey focused on incidents of specific crimes/offenses and a variety of specific discipline issues in public schools. The survey was conducted with a nationally representative sample of regular public elementary, middle, and high schools in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Special education, alternative and vocational schools, schools in the territories, and schools that taught only prekindergarten, kindergarten, or adult education were not included in the sample. The sample of public schools was selected from the 1993-94 NCES Common Core of Data (CCD) Public School Universe File. The sample was stratified by instructional level, locale, and school size. Within the primary strata, schools were also sorted by geographic region and by percent minority enrollment. The sample sizes were then allocated to the primary strata in rough proportion to the aggregate square root of the size of enrollment of schools in the stratum. A total of 1,415 schools were selected. Among them, 11 schools were found no longer to be in existence, and 1,234 schools completed the survey. In April 1997, questionnaires were mailed to school principals, who were asked to complete the survey or to have it completed by the person most knowledgeable about discipline issues at the school. The raw response rate was 88 percent (1,234 schools divided by the 1,404 eligible schools in the sample). The weighted overall response rate was 89 percent, and item nonresponse rates ranged from 0 percent to 0.9 percent. The weights were developed to adjust for the variable probabilities of selection and differential nonresponse and can be used to produce national estimates for regular public schools in the 1996-97 school year. For more information about the FRSS: Principal/School Disciplinarian Survey on School Violence, contact: Shelley Burns National Center for Education Statistics 1990 K Street NW Washington, DC 20006 Telephone: (202) 502-7319 E-mail: Shelley.Burns@ed.gov National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), administered for the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics by the Census Bureau, is the nation's primary source of information on crime victimization and the victims of crime. Initiated in 1972 and redesigned in 1992, the NCVS collects detailed information on the frequency and nature of the crimes of rape, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated and simple assault, theft, household burglary, and motor vehicle theft experienced by Americans and their households each year. The survey measures crimes reported as well as those not reported to police. The NCVS sample consists of about 50,000 households selected using a stratified, multistage cluster design. In the first stage, the primary sampling units (PSUs), consisting of counties or groups of counties, were selected. In the second stage, smaller areas, called Enumeration Districts (EDs), were selected from each sampled PSU. Finally, from selected EDs, clusters of four households, called segments, were selected for interview. At each stage, the selection was done proportionate to population size in order to create a self-weighting sample. The final sample was augmented to account for housing units constructed after the decennial Census. Within each sampled household, Census Bureau personnel interviewed all household members ages 12 and older to determine whether they had been victimized by the measured crimes during the 6 months preceding the interview. About 90,000 persons ages 12 and older are interviewed each 6 months. Households remain in the sample for 3 years and are interviewed 7 times at 6-month intervals. The initial interview at each sample unit is used only to bound future interviews to establish a time frame to avoid duplication of crimes uncovered in these subsequent interviews. After their seventh interview, households are replaced by new sample households. The NCVS has consistently obtained a response rate of about 95 percent at the household level. During the study period, the completion rates for persons within households were about 91 percent. Thus, final response rates were about 86 percent. Weights were developed to permit estimates for the total U.S. population 12 years and older. For more information about the NCVS, contact: Michael Rand Victimization Statistics U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics 810 7th Street NW Washington, DC 20531 Telephone: (202) 616-3494 E-mail: randm@ojp.usdoj.gov Internet: www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/ School Crime Supplement (SCS) Created as a supplement to the NCVS and co-designed by the National Center for Education Statistics and Bureau of Justice Statistics, the School Crime Supplement (SCS) survey was conducted in 1989, 1995, and 1999 to collect additional information about school-related victimizations on a national level. The survey was designed to assist policymakers as well as academic researchers and practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels so that they can make informed decisions concerning crime in schools. The SCS asks students a number of key questions about their experiences with and perceptions of crime and violence that occurred inside their school, on school grounds, or on the way to or from school. Additional questions not included in the NCVS were also added to the SCS, such as those concerning preventive measures used by the school, students' participation in afterschool activities, students' perceptions of school rules, the presence of weapons and street gangs in school, the presence of hate-related words and graffiti in school, student reports of bullying at school, and the availability of drugs and alcohol in school, as well as attitudinal questions relating to fear of victimization and avoidance behavior in school. In 1989, 1995, and 1999, the SCS was conducted for a 6-month period from January through June in all households selected for the NCVS (see discussion above for information about the sampling design). It should be noted that the initial NCVS interview is included in the SCS data analysis. Within these households, the eligible respondents for the SCS were those household members who had attended school at any time during the 6 months preceding the interview, and were enrolled in grades 6 through 12 in a school that would help them advance toward eventually receiving a high school diploma. Eligible respondents were asked the supplemental questions in the SCS only after completing their entire NCVS interview. For the 1989 and the 1995 SCS, 19-year-old household members also were considered eligible for the SCS interview. This upper age range was lowered to 18 for eligibility in the 1999 SCS because it was determined that most 19-year-olds did not meet the other eligibility requirement of being currently enrolled in a secondary school. In this report, 19-year-olds were excluded from the analysis of the 1995 data in order to meet the eligibility requirements and to allow for comparisons to the 1999 SCS. However, the 19-year-olds were not dropped from the analysis of the 1989 data. Comparisons between the 1989 data and the 1995 and 1999 data should be made with caution due to the redesign of the NCVS in 1992. A new victimization screening procedure, put in place in 1992, was meant to elicit a more complete tally of victimization incidents than did the one used in prior NCVS collections. Therefore, NCVS item-based cross-year changes in reported victimization rates, or lack thereof, may only be the result of changes in how the questions were asked and not of actual changes in the incidence of victimization. Because NCVS questionnaires were completed before students were given the SCS, it is likely that these changes to the NCVS victimization screening procedures differentially affected responses to the 1989 and 1995 SCS victimization items. Other items in this report, such as fear at school, avoidance of places at school, and reports of gangs at school, followed the victimization items on the SCS survey. Unlike prior Indicators reports, the prevalence of victimization for 1995 and 1999 was calculated by using NCVS incident variables appended to the 1995 and 1999 SCS data files. The NCVS type of crime variable was used to classify victimizations of students in the SCS as serious violent, violent, or theft. The NCVS variables asking where the incident happened and what the victim was doing when it happened were used to ascertain whether the incident happened at school. For prevalence of victimization, the NCVS definition of "at school" includes in the school building, on school property, or on the way to or from school. Total victimization is a combination of violent victimization and theft. If the student reported an incident of either, he or she is counted as having experienced "total" victimization. If the student reported having experienced both, he or she is counted once under "total" victimization. Serious violent crimes include rape, sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault. Violent crimes include serious violent crimes and simple assault. A total of 10,449 students participated in the 1989 SCS, 9,728 in the 1995 SCS, and 8,398 in 1999. In the 1999 SCS, the household completion rate was 94 percent. In the 1989 and 1995 SCS, the household completion rates were 97 percent and 95 percent, respectively; and the student completion rates were 86 percent and 78 percent, respectively. For the 1999 SCS, the student completion rate was 78 percent. Thus, the overall SCS response rate (calculated by multiplying the household completion rate by the student completion rate) was 84 percent in 1989, 74 percent in 1995, and 73 percent in 1999. Response rates for most survey items were high-mostly over 95 percent of all eligible respondents. The weights were developed to compensate for differential probabilities of selection and nonresponse. The weighted data permit inferences about the eligible student population who were enrolled in schools in 1989, 1995, and 1999. For more information about SCS, contact: Kathryn A. Chandler National Center for Education Statistics 1990 K Street NW Washington, DC 20006 Telephone: (202) 502-7326 E-mail: Kathryn.Chandler@ed.gov School Associated Violent Death Study (SAVD) The School Associated Violent Death Study (SAVD) is an epidemiological study developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Justice. SAVD seeks to describe the epidemiology of school-associated violent deaths, identify common features of these deaths, estimate the rate of school-associated violent death in the United States, and identify potential risk factors for these deaths. The study includes descriptive data on all school-associated violent deaths in the United States, including all homicides, suicides, and firearm-related deaths where the fatal injury occurred on the campus of a functioning elementary or secondary school, while the victim was on the way to or from regular sessions at such a school, or while attending or on the way to or from an official school-sponsored event. Victims of such events include nonstudents as well as students and staff members. SAVD includes descriptive information about the school, event, victim(s), and offender(s). The first SAVD study collected data for July 1, 1992-June 30, 1994 and the follow-up study includes July 1, 1994- June 30, 1999. The follow-up study is nearing completion, and data presented in this report include preliminary findings for the 1998-1999 school year. SAVD uses a four-step process to identify and collect data on school-associated violent deaths. Cases were initially identified through a search of the Lexis/ Nexis and Dialog newspaper and media databases. Then police officials are contacted to confirm the details of the case to determine if the event meets the case definition. Once a case is confirmed, a police official and a school official are interviewed in regards to details about the school, event, victim(s), and offender(s). If police officials are unwilling or unable to complete the interview, a copy of the full police report is obtained. The information obtained about schools includes school demographics, attendance/ absentee rates, suspension/expulsions and mobility, school history of weapon carrying, security measures, violence prevention activities, school response to the event, and school policies about weapon carrying. Event information includes the location of injury, the context of injury (while classes held, during break, etc.), motives for injury, method of injury, and school and community events happening around the time period. Information obtained on victim(s) and offender(s) includes demographics, circumstances of the event (date/time, alcohol or drug use, number of persons involved), types and origins of weapons, criminal history, psychological risk factors, school-related problems, extracurricular activities, and family history including structure and stressors. One hundred and five school-associated violent deaths were identified from July 1, 1992-June 30, 1994 (See Kachur et al. June 12, 1996. JAMA. 275:22: 1729-1733). While the current study is still ongoing, over 250 school-associated violent deaths have been identified for July 1, 1994-June 30, 1999. The first study achieved a response rate of 85 percent for police officials and 81 percent for school officials. To date, the current study has achieved 96 percent for police officials and 79 percent for school officials. For additional information about SAVD, contact: Mark Anderson Division of Violence Prevention National Center for Injury Prevention and Control Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Mailstop K60 4770 Buford Highway NE Atlanta, GA 30341 Telephone: (770) 488-4762 E-mail: mea6@cdc.gov Accuracy of Estimates The accuracy of any statistic is determined by the joint effects of "nonsampling" and "sampling" errors. Both types of error affect the estimates presented in this report. Several sources can contribute to nonsampling errors. For example, members of the population of interest are inadvertently excluded from the sampling frame; sampled members refuse to answer some of the survey questions (item nonresponse) or all of the survey questions (questionnaire nonresponse); mistakes are made during data editing, coding, or entry; the responses that respondents provide differ from the "true" responses; or measurement instruments such as tests or questionnaires fail to measure the characteristics they are intended to measure. Although nonsampling errors due to questionnaire and item nonresponse can be reduced somewhat by the adjustment of sample weights and imputation procedures, correcting nonsampling errors or gauging the effects of these errors is usually difficult. Sampling errors occur because observations are made on samples rather than on entire populations. Surveys of population universes are not subject to sampling errors. Estimates based on a sample will differ somewhat from those that would have been obtained by a complete census of the relevant population using the same survey instruments, instructions, and procedures. The standard error of a statistic is a measure of the variation due to sampling; it indicates the precision of the statistic obtained in a particular sample. In addition, the standard errors for two sample statistics can be used to estimate the precision of the difference between the two statistics and to help determine whether the difference based on the sample is large enough so that it represents the population difference. Most of the data used in this report were obtained from complex sampling designs rather than a simple random design. In these sampling designs, data were collected through stratification, clustering, unequal selection probabilities, or multistage sampling. These features of the sampling usually result in estimated statistics that are more variable (that is, have larger standard errors) than they would have been if they had been based on data from a simple random sample of the same size. Therefore, calculation of standard errors requires procedures that are markedly different from the ones used when the data are from a simple random sample. The Taylor series approximation technique or the balanced repeated replication (BRR) method was used to estimate most of the statistics and their standard errors in this report. Table B3 lists the various methods used to compute standard errors for different data sets. Standard error calculation for data from the National Crime Victimization Survey and the School Crime Supplement relied on a combination of procedures. For statistics based on the 1995 and 1999 SCS data, the Taylor series approximation method using PSU and strata variables available from the data set was employed. For statistics based on all years of NCVS data and the 1989 SCS data, standard errors were derived from a formula developed by the Census Bureau, which consists of three generalized variance function (gvf) constant parameters that represent the curve fitted to the individual standard errors calculated using the Jackknife Repeated Replication technique. The formulas used to compute the adjusted standard errors associated with percentages or population counts can be found in table B3. Statistical Procedures The comparisons in the text have been tested for statistical significance to ensure that the differences are larger than might be expected due to sampling variations. Unless otherwise noted, all statements cited in the report are statistically significant at the .05 level. Several test procedures were used, depending upon the type of data being analyzed and the nature of the statement being tested. The primary test procedure used in this report was the Student's t statistic, which tests the difference between two sample estimates, for example, between males and females. The formula used to compute the t statistic is as follows: (See equation in original report) where E1 and E2 are the estimates to be compared and se1 and se2 are their corresponding standard errors. Note that this formula is valid only for independent estimates. When the estimates are not independent (for example, when comparing a total percentage with that for a subgroup included in the total), a covariance term (i.e., 2*se1*se2) must be added to the denominator of the formula: (See equation original report) Once the t value was computed, it was compared with the published tables of values at certain critical levels, called alpha levels. For this report, an alpha value of 0.05 was used, which has a t value of 1.96. If the t value was larger than 1.96, then the difference between the two estimates was statistically significant at the 95 percent level. When multiple comparisons among more than two groups were made, for example, among racial/ ethnic groups, a Bonferroni adjustment to the significance level was used to ensure that the significance level for the tests as a group was at the .05 level. Generally, when multiple statistical comparisons are made, it becomes increasingly likely that an indication of a population difference is erroneous. Even when there is no difference in the population, at an alpha of .05, there is still a 5 percent chance of concluding that an observed t value representing one comparison in the sample is large enough to be statistically significant. As the number of comparisons increase, the risk of making such an erroneous inference also increases. The Bonferroni procedure corrects the significance (or alpha) level for the total number of comparisons made within a particular classification variable. For each classification variable, there are (K*(K-1)/2) possible comparisons (or nonredundant pairwise combinations), where K is the number of categories. The Bonferroni procedure divides the alpha level for a single t test by the number of possible pairwise comparisons in order to produce a new alpha level that is corrected for the fact that multiple contrasts are being made. As a result, the t value for a certain alpha level (e.g., .05) increases, which makes it more difficult to claim that the difference observed is statistically significant. Finally, a linear trend test was used when a statement describing a linear trend, rather than the differences between two discrete categories, was made. This test allows one to examine whether, for example, the percentage of students using drugs increased (or decreased) over time or whether the percentage of students who reported being physically attacked in school increased (or decreased) with their age. Based on a regression with, for example, student's age as the independent variable and whether a student was physically attacked as the dependent variable, the test involves computing the regression coefficient (b) and its corresponding standard error (se). The ratio of these two (b/se) is the test statistic t. If t is greater than 1.96, the critical value for one comparison at the .05 alpha level, the hypothesis that there is a linear relationship between student's age and being physically attacked is not rejected. APPENDIX C. GLOSSARY OF TERMS General Terms Cluster sampling Cluster sampling is a technique in which the sampling of respondents or subjects occurs within clusters or groups. For example, selecting students by sampling schools and the students that attend that school. Crime Any violation of a statute or regulation or any act that the government has determined is injurious to the public, including felonies and misdemeanors. Such violation may or may not involve violence, and it may affect individuals or property. Incident A specific criminal act or offense involving one or more victims and one or more offenders. Multi-stage sampling A survey sampling technique in which there is more than one wave of sampling. That is, one sample of units is drawn, and then another sample is drawn within that sample. For example, at the first stage, a number of Census blocks may be sampled out of all the Census blocks in the United States. At the second stage, households are sampled within the previously sampled Census blocks. Prevalence The percentage of the population directly affected by crime in a given period. This rate is based upon specific information elicited directly from the respondent regarding crimes committed against his or her person, against his or her property, or against an individual bearing a unique relationship to him or her. It is not based upon perceptions and beliefs about, or reactions to, criminal acts. School An education institution consisting of one or more of grades K through 12. School crime Any criminal activity that is committed on school property. School year The 12-month period of time denoting the beginning and ending dates for school accounting purposes, usually from July 1 through June 30. Stratification Stratification is a survey sampling technique in which the target population is divided into mutually exclusive groups or strata based on some variable or variables (e.g., metropolitan area) and sampling of units occurs separately within each stratum. Unequal probabilities A survey sampling technique in which sampled units do not have the same probability of selection into the sample. For example, the investigator may over-sample minority students in order to increase the sample sizes of minority students. Minority students would then be more likely than other students to be sampled. Specific Terms Used in Various Surveys National Crime Victimization Survey At school (students) Inside the school building, on school property (school parking area, play area, school bus, etc.), or on the way to or from school. At school (teachers) Inside the school building, on school property (school parking area, play area, school bus, etc.), at work site, or while working. For thefts, "while working" was not considered, since thefts of teachers' property kept at school can occur when teachers are not present. Aggravated assault Attack or attempted attack with a weapon, regardless of whether or not an injury occurs, and attack without a weapon when serious injury results. Rape Forced sexual intercourse including both psychological coercion as well as physical force. Forced sexual intercourse means vaginal, anal, or oral penetration by the offender(s). This category also includes incidents where the penetration is from a foreign object such as a bottle. Robbery Completed or attempted theft, directly from a person, of property or cash by force or threat of force, with or without a weapon, and with or without injury. Rural A place not located inside the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). This category includes a variety of localities, ranging from sparsely populated rural areas to cities with populations of less than 50,000. Serious violent crime Rape, sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated assault. Sexual assault A wide range of victimizations, separate from rape or attempted rape. These crimes include attacks or attempted attacks generally involving unwanted sexual contact between the victim and offender. Sexual assault may or may not involve force and includes such things as grabbing or fondling. Sexual assault also includes verbal threats. Simple assault Attack without a weapon resulting either in no injury, minor injury, or in undetermined injury requiring less than 2 days of hospitalization. Also includes attempted assault without a weapon. Suburban A county or counties containing a central city, plus any contiguous counties that are linked socially and economically to the central city. On the data tables, suburban areas are categorized as those portions of metropolitan areas situated "outside central cities." Theft Completed or attempted theft of property or cash without personal contact. Victimization A crime as it affects one individual person or household. For personal crimes, the number of victimizations is equal to the number of victims involved. The number of victimizations may be greater than the number of incidents because more than one person may be victimized during an incident. Victimization rate A measure of the occurrence of victimizations among a specific population group. Violent crime Rape, sexual assault, robbery, or assault. Urban The largest city (or grouping of cities) in an MSA. School Crime Supplement Any victimization Combination of violent and property victimization. If a student reported an incident of either, he or she is counted as having experienced any victimization. If the student reported having experienced both, he or she is counted once under "any victimization." At school In the school building, on the school grounds, or on a school bus. Property victimization Theft of property from a student's desk, locker, or other locations at school. Violent victimization Physical attacks or taking property from the student directly by force, weapons, or threats. Youth Risk Behavior Survey On school property On school property is included in the question wording but was not defined for respondents. Weapon Examples of weapons appearing in the questionnaire include guns, knives, and clubs. Illegal drugs Examples of illegal drugs were marijuana, cocaine, inhalants, steroids, or prescription drugs without a doctor's permission, heroin, and methamphetamines. FRSS Principal/School Disciplinarian Survey At school In school buildings, on school buses, on school grounds, or at places that hold school-sponsored events or activities, but are not officially on school grounds. Central region Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. City A central city of a Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). Elementary school A school that has a low grade of 3 or less and a high grade of 1 through 8. Free/reduced-price lunch The percent of students enrolled in the school who are eligible for the federally funded free or reduced-price lunch program. High school/combined A school that has a low grade of 9 through 12 and a high grade of 10 through 12. Schools that do not precisely meet these qualifications, and are not elementary and middle schools, are classified as "combined" and are included in the analyses with high schools. Less serious or nonviolent crime Physical attack or fight without a weapon, theft or larceny, or vandalism. Minority enrollment The percentage of students enrolled in the school whose race or ethnicity is classified as one of the following: American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian or Pacific Islander, black, or Hispanic, based on data in the 1993-94 Common Core of Data (CCD) file. Middle school A school that has a low grade of 4 through 9 and a high grade of 4 through 9. Northeast region Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Robbery The taking or attempting to take anything of value that is owned by another person or organization, under confrontational circumstances by force or threat of force or violence and/or by putting the victim in fear. Physical attack or fight An actual and intentional touching or striking of another person against his or her will, or the intentional causing of bodily harm to an individual. This category should be used only when the attack is serious enough to warrant calling the police or other law enforcement representative. Rural A place with a population less than 2,500 and defined as rural by the U.S. Bureau of the Census. School enrollment Total number of students enrolled as defined by the 1993-94 CCD. Serious violent crime Murder, suicide, rape or sexual battery, physical attack or fight with a weapon, or robbery. Sexual battery An incident that includes rape, fondling, indecent liberties, child molestation, or sodomy. Southeast region Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. Theft or larceny The unlawful taking of another person's property without personal confrontation, threat, violence, or bodily harm. Town A place not within an MSA, but with a population greater than or equal to 2,500 and defined as urban by the U.S. Bureau of the Census. Urban fringe A place within an MSA of a central city, but not primarily its central city. Vandalism The damage or destruction of school property. West region Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Schools and Staffing Survey Central city A large central city (a central city of a Metropolitan Statistical Area [MSA] with population greater than or equal to 400,000, or a population density greater than or equal to 6,000 per square mile) or a mid-size central city (a central city of an MSA, but not designated as a large central city). Elementary school teachers An elementary school teacher is one who, when asked for the grades taught, checked: 1) only "ungraded" and was designated as an elementary teacher on the list of teachers provided by the school; 2) 6th grade or lower, or "ungraded, " and no grade higher than 6th; 3) 6th grade or lower and 7th grade or higher, and reported a primary assignment of prekindergarten, kindergarten, or general elementary; 4) 7th and 8th grades only, and reported a primary assignment of prekindergarten, kindergarten, or general elementary; 5) 6th grade or lower and 7th grade or higher, and reported a primary assignment of special education and was designated as an elementary teacher on the list of teachers provided by the school; or 6) 7th and 8th grades only, and reported a primary assignment of special education and was designated as an elementary teacher on the list of teachers provided by the school. A teacher at school that has grade 6 or lower, or one that is "ungraded" with no grade higher than the 8th. Rural or small town Rural area (a place with a population of less than 2,500 and defined as rural by the U.S. Bureau of the Census) or a small town (a place not within an MSA, with a population of less than 25,000, but greater than or equal to 2,500, and defined as nonurban by the U.S. Bureau of the Census). Secondary school teachers A secondary school teacher is one who, when asked for the grades taught, checked: 1) "ungraded" and was designated as a secondary teacher on the list of teachers provided by the school; 2) 6th grade or lower and 7th grade or higher, and reported a primary assignment other than prekindergarten, kindergarten, or general elementary; 3) 9th grade or higher, or 9th grade or higher and "ungraded"; 4) 7th and 8th grades only, and reported a primary assignment other than prekindergarten, kindergarten, general elementary, or special education; 5) 7th and 8th grades only, and reported a primary assignment of special education and was designated as a secondary teacher on the list of teachers provided by the school; or 6) 6th grade or lower and 7th grade or higher, or 7th and 8th grades only, and was not categorized above as either elementary or secondary. Urban fringe or large town Urban fringe of a large or mid-size city (a place within an MSA of a mid-size central city and defined as urban by the U.S. Bureau of the Census) or a large town (a place not within an MSA, but with a population greater or equal to 25,000 and defined as urban by the U.S. Bureau of the Census). S. Patrick Kachur et al., "School-Associated Violent Deaths in the United States, 1992 to 1994" Homicide An act involving a killing of one person by another resulting from interpersonal violence. School-associated violent death A homicide or suicide in which the fatal injury occurred on the campus of a functioning elementary or secondary school in the United States, while the victim was on the way to or from regular sessions at such a school, or while the victim was attending or traveling to or from an official school-sponsored event. Victims included nonstudents as well as students and staff members. Suicide An act of taking one's own life voluntarily and intentionally.