The victimization of students at school is currently a matter of grave public concern. This study attempts to identify factors that single out junior and senior high school students as victims of campus theft and violent crime. Previous research indicates that victimization risk can flow from a variety of situational and individual variables, although this research has not focused on victimization in the school setting. To test which factors are most salient at school, we employed the 1993 National Household and Education Survey, School Safety and Discipline component (NHES-SSD). We found that although community variables exert some effect on schoolyard victimization risk, risk levels are associated with the presence of likely offenders at school as well as individual students who have delinquent characteristics and criminal associates. The attempts of schools to protect students through target-hardening strategies (e.g., metal detectors and security guards) were consistently unsuccessful.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Brick, J. M., Collins, M., & Chandler, K. (1997). An overview of response rates in the National Household Education Survey: 1991, 1993, 1995, and 1996. (NCES No. 97-948). Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education and National Center for Education Statistics.
2.
Brick, J. M., Keeter, S., Waksberg, J., & Bell, B. (1996). Adjusting for coverage bias using telephone service interruption data. (NCES No. 97-336). Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education and National Center for Education Statistics.
3.
Brick, J. M., Tubbs, E., Collins, M. A., & Nolin, M. J. (1997). Unit and item response, weighting, and imputation procedures in the 1993 National Household Education Survey (NHES:93). (Working Paper No. 97-05). Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education and National Center for Education Statistics.
4.
Bryk, A., & Raudenbusch, S. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
5.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. (1999). Criminal victimization 1998. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
6.
Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 52, 170-183.
7.
Cohen, L. E., Kluegel, J. R., & Land, K. (1981). Social inequality and predatory criminal victimization: An exposition and test of a formal theory. American Sociological Review, 46, 505-524.
8.
Cooper, K. J., & Russakopf, D. (1999, May 27). Schools accused of overreacting in disciplining students. The Washington Post, p. A1.
9.
Erickson, M., & Jensen, G. F. (1977). Delinquency is still group behavior!: Toward revitalizing the group premise in the sociology of deviance. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 68, 262-273.
10.
Felson, M. (1986). Linking criminal choices, routine activities, informal control, and criminal outcomes. In D. B. Cornish & R. V. Clarke (Eds.), The reasoning criminal: Rational choice perspectives on offending, (pp. 119-128). New York: Springer-Verlag.
11.
Felson, M. (1998). Crime and everyday life. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge.
12.
Felson, R. B. (1996). Big people hit little people: Sex differences in physical power and interpersonal violence. Criminology, 34, 433-452.
13.
Ferdinand, P. (2001, December 27). Shaken but unharmed, Mass. school says `the system worked.' The Washington Post, p. A3.
14.
Fisher, B. S., Sloan, J. J., Cullen, F. T., & Lu, C. (1998). Crime in the ivory tower: The level and sources of student victimization. Criminology, 36, 671-710.
15.
Garofalo, J. (1987). Reassessing the lifestyle model of criminal victimization. In M. Gottfredson, & T. Hirschi (Eds.), Positive criminology (pp. 23-42). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
16.
Gottfredson, G. D., & Gottfredson, D. C. (1985). Victimization in schools. New York: Plenum.
17.
Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
18.
Hindelang, M. S., Gottfredson M. R., & Garofalo, J. (1978). Victims of personal crime. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
19.
Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.
20.
Jensen, G. F., & Brownfield, D. M. (1986). Gender, lifestyles, and victimization: Beyond routine activity theory. Violence & Victims, 1, 85-99.
21.
Kasarda, J., & Janowitz, M. (1974). Community attachment in mass society. American Sociological Review, 39, 328-339.
22.
Kaufman, P., Chen, X., Choy, S. P., Ruddy, S. A., Miller, A. K., Chandler, K. A., et al. (1999). Indicators of school crime and safety. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Justice.
23.
Kennedy, L. W., & Forde, D. R. (1990). Routine activities and crime: An analysis of victimization in Canada. Criminology, 28, 137-152.
24.
Lab, S. P., & Clark, R. D. (1997). Crime prevention in schools: Individual and collective responses. In S. P. Lab (Ed.), Crime prevention at a crossroads (pp. 127-140). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
25.
Lauritsen, J. L. (2001). The social ecology of violent victimization: individual and contextual effects in the NCVS. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 17, 3-37.
26.
Lauritsen, J. L., Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (1991). Addressing the link between offending and victimization among adolescents. Criminology, 29, 265-291.
27.
Miethe, T. D., & McDowall, D. (1993). Contextual effects in models of criminal victimization. Social Forces, 71, 741-749.
28.
Miethe, T. D., & Meier, R. F. (1994). Crime and its social context: Toward an integrated theory of offenders, victims, and situations. Albany: State University of New York Press.
29.
Miethe, T. D., Stafford, M. C., & Long, J. S. (1987). Social differentiation in criminal victimization: A test of routine activities/lifestyles theories. American Sociological Review, 52, 184-194.
30.
Miethe, T. D., Stafford, M. C., & Sloan, D. (1990). Lifestyle changes and risk of criminal victimization. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 6, 357-376.
31.
Mustaine, E. E., & Tewksbury, R. (1998). Predicting risks of larceny theft victimization: A routine activity analysis using refined activity measures. Criminology, 36, 829-858.
32.
Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Oxford: Blackwell.
33.
Olweus, D. (1996). Bully/victim problems at school: Facts and effective intervention. Journal of Emotional & Behavioral Problems, 5, 15-22.
34.
Piquero, A. R., Hickman, M., & Henderson, K. (in press). Extending Tittle's control balance theory to account for victimization. Criminal Justice & Behavior.
35.
Regoli, R. M., & Hewitt, J. D. (2000). Delinquency in society. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
36.
Rosenbaum, D. P. (1987). Community crime prevention: A review and synthesis of the literature. Justice Quarterly, 5, 323-395.
37.
Rountree, P. W., Land, K. C., & Miethe, T. D. (1994). Macro-micro integration in the study of victimization: A hierarchical logistic model analysis across Seattle neighborhoods. Criminology, 32, 387-414.
38.
Sampson, R. J., & Lauritsen, J. L. (1990). Deviant lifestyles, proximity to crime, and the offender-victim link in personal violence. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 27, 110-139.
39.
Schreck, C. J. (1999). Criminal victimization and low self-control: An extension and test of a general theory of crime. Justice Quarterly, 16, 633-654.
40.
Schreck, C. J., Wright, R. A., & Miller, J. M. (2002). A study of the individual and situational antecedents of violent victimization. Justice Quarterly, 19, 159-180.
41.
Shaw, C., & McKay, H. (1942). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
42.
Singer, S. I. (1981). Homogeneous victim-offenders populations: A review and some research implications. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 72, 779-788.
43.
Snyder, H., Sickmund, M., & Poe- Yamagata, E. (1996). Juvenile offenders and victims: 1996 update on violence: Statistics summary. Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice.
44.
Suttles, G. (1968). The social order of the slum. Chicago: University of Chicago.
45.
Tittle, C. R. (1995). Control balance: Toward a general theory of deviance. Boulder, CO: Westview.
46.
Toby, J. (1983). Violence in school. In M. Tonry & N. Morris (Eds.), Crime and justice: An annual review of research (pp. 1-47). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
47.
Tucker, N. (2001, April 11). Report says youth violence overplayed. The Washington Post, p. B2.
48.
Wallace, L. H. (2001). Reports from rural Mississippi: A look at school violence. Journal of Security Administration, 24, 15-32.
49.
Welsh, W. N. (2001). Effects of student and school factors on five measures of school disorder. Justice Quarterly, 18, 911-947.
50.
Welsh, W. N., Greene, J. R., & Jenkins, P. H. (1999). School disorder: The influence of individual, institutional, and community factors. Criminology, 37, 73-115.
51.
Welsh, W. N., Stokes, R., & Greene, J. R. (2000). A macro-level model of school disorder. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 37, 243-283.
52.
Whitaker, C. J., & Bastian, L. D. (1991). Teenage victims: A national crime survey report. (Report No. NCJ-128129). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
