The Psychology of School Climate [1 ed.] 9781443896689, 9781443894500

Citation preview

The Psychology of School Climate

The Psychology of School Climate By

Garry Wade McGiboney

The Psychology of School Climate By Garry Wade McGiboney This book first published 2016 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2016 by Garry Wade McGiboney All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-4438-9450-8 ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-9450-0

How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment to improve the world. —Anne Frank

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface ........................................................................................................ ix Acknowledgements ..................................................................................... x Chapter One ................................................................................................. 1 Introduction Chapter Two .............................................................................................. 17 School Climate and Student Achievement Chapter Three ............................................................................................ 38 School Climate, Social Emotional Learning, and Mental Health Chapter Four .............................................................................................. 56 School Climate and Connectedness, Engagement, and Relationships Chapter Five .............................................................................................. 74 School Climate and Teachers Chapter Six ................................................................................................ 85 School Climate and Leadership Chapter Seven.......................................................................................... 107 School Climate and Student Discipline and Safety Chapter Eight ........................................................................................... 130 School Climate and Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports Chapter Nine............................................................................................ 147 School Climate and Physical Health and Activity Level of Students Chapter Ten ............................................................................................. 155 School Climate and Institutional Environment (School Building and Grounds)

viii

Table of Contents

Chapter Eleven ........................................................................................ 167 School Climate Assessment Chapter Twelve ....................................................................................... 186 School Climate and Racial and Ethnic Climate Chapter Thirteen ...................................................................................... 193 School Climate and Population-Based Effects Dropping Out of School and the Role of School Climate Sexual Orientation and the Importance of School Climate School Climate and the Community and Home School Climate and Military Students Chapter Fourteen ..................................................................................... 207 School Climate: Part of the Larger Whole References ............................................................................................... 222 Index ........................................................................................................ 257

PREFACE

This book was written as an outgrowth of curiosity and impatience. Many people have become impatient with school reform and school improvement efforts and the assembly line of articles and books on the topic that fail to mention school climate, much less the importance and vital nature and necessity of school climate, not only as an essential component of school reform and school improvement, but also as a necessary strategy for maintaining excellent schools and providing healthy and safe schools for all students. Many struggling schools were at some time in the past good schools. What happened to them? Some experts claim that the schools declined because of changing demographics. But that happens all the time and yet not all schools that experience demographic changes sink into failure or mediocrity. Is it possible that the quality of the school climate diminished over time in those schools, which negatively impacted expectations and student achievement outcomes? Research strongly suggests that educators and policy makers have a lot to learn about the importance of school climate for school safety, social and emotional development, and academic success. With the growing body of research regarding school climate it is important to study the research and understand how the psychology of school climate and how the elements of school climate can be viewed from a population-based perspective, as well as understanding the impact of school climate on individual students. This review of school climate research includes hundreds of articles and research papers of different perspectives from around the world in numerous cultures. School climate is becoming a science of education and psychology that must be studied further in order to understand the dynamic nature of learning environments, to identify elements that support or threaten the learning environment, and to learn how to improve the conditions for learning in all schools.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This book seeks to highlight some of the important components of school climate and why they are so important to the academic, social, and emotional development of children and the efficacy of teachers. Without linking them to anything other than whatever positive features of the book that may emerge, I am indebted to friends and colleagues who helped shape my thinking and inspired my curiosity about so many things related to the impact of school climate and improving education for all children. In particular, I would like to thank Joel Meyers, Arianne Weldon, Howard Hendley, Louis Erste, Allan Meyer, Marilyn Watson, Jeff Hodges, Debbie Gay, Ginny O’Connell, and Marie Jacobs.

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

“School climate is like the air we breathe; it tends to go unnoticed until something goes wrong.” —Jerome Freiburg1

In 1851, Henry David Thoreau wrote, “What's the use of a fine house if you haven't got a tolerable planet to put it on?”2 The same could be said of a child and his school: what’s the use of a child motivated to learn if there are no tolerable schools to put him in? Mark Twain often wrote about the interaction of his literary characters with their environment - on a raft, in a classroom, in a newspaper office, in a saloon, and countless other places. In his book, Follow the Equator, Mark Twain wrote, “It is your human environment that makes climate.”3 Throughout the history of literature and world history and embedded in man’s search for peace and purpose, a person’s environment plays a central role. Silva Cartwright said that the quest for peace begins in the home, in the school, and in the workplace.4 School climate as a whole is more than the sum of its parts. Kurt Lewin’s work on Gestalt psychology comes from the concept of “gestalt,” which in German literally means “form, shape.”5 From his study of gestalt, Lewin developed the Field Theory, an approach to the study of human behavior that was the genesis of social psychology and one of the first, if 1

Jerome Freiburg, School Climate: Measuring, improving and sustaining healthy learning environments (Falmer Press, 1999). 2 Henry David Thoreau. The quote was written by Thoreau in a letter to his friend Harrison Blake on May 20, 1860. Retrieved from Henry David Thoreau Archives, http://www.digitalthoreau.org/. 3 Mark Twain, Following the Equator (Hartford: The American Publishing Company, 1897). 4 Silva Cartwright, New Zealand Judge and Statesman. Quote taken from a speech given to judges at a conference in New Zealand in 1991. 5 Calvin S. Hall, review of “A Dynamic Theory of Personality,” by Kurt Lewin, American Journal of Psychology, 48, no. 2 (1936): 353-355. doi:10.2307/1415758.

2

Chapter One

not the first, scientific reference to organizational climate. He pursued the study of causal relationships between and among those things that influence human behavior across the traditional boundaries of various sciences, including a person’s environment. In his 1935 publication, A Dynamic Theory of Personality, Lewin wrote, “Every psychological event depends upon the state of the person and at the same time on the environment, although their relative importance is different in different cases.” 6 Lewin developed a formula that highlighted the interaction between a person and the environment: behavior is a function of both person and environment: b=f (P,E). This is a simple and yet complicated description of the interaction and interplay between people of all ages and their environments. Schneider, Bowen, Ehrhart, and Holcombe claim that Lewin’s work on social climate offered the first definition of organizational climate and its influence on people.7 They wrote that organizational climate “is a gestalt that is based on perceived patterns in the specific experiences and behaviors of people in organizations.” They added, “…The sense people make of the patterns of experiences and behaviors they have, or other parties to the situation have, constitutes the climate of the situation.” People move each day from one climate to another, sometimes even within the same organization. When a person leaves work or school and rides a bus home, that person is leaving one climate and entering another one; even the bus has a climate. Climate is so pervasive to be ubiquitous; it’s everywhere. The climate at work, school, playgrounds, restaurants, places of worship, and other places constantly interacts with our personalities, beliefs, fears, expectations, and physical and mental health and affects our lives in powerful ways. School climate is a widely used term that some have cautiously tried to define as falling within the Input-Output theories typically used to describe business environments and economic systems because schools input resources that influence student outputs (outcomes), such as student achievement.8 Others, however, view school climate as less of a business

6

Ibid. Benjamin Schneider, David E. Bowen, Mark G. Ehrhart, and Karen M. Holcombe, “The Climate for Service: Evolution of a Construct,” in Handbook of Organizational Culture and Climate, eds. Neal M. Ashkanasy, Celeste P.M. Wilderom, and Mark F. Peterson (Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2000), 21-36. 8 Tamika LaSalle, “Cultural and Ecological Considerations within the Context of School Climate” (dissertation, Georgia State University, 2013). 7

Introduction

3

or economic system and more of a cultural system.9 The difference is significant because the cultural system model focuses on correlations and causation that are determined by relationships, interactions, and the psycho-sociological interplay of human behavior within a social system. Researchers and theorists have also added the ecological theory to the study of school climate using Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Theory to, Describe the nature of interactions ranging from immediate contexts (i.e., family and school) to overarching institutional patterns and cultural influences (i.e., political policies and social structures). The microsystem compasses the interactions, activities, and social roles that take place between the individual and their immediate environment (e.g., home or school). The mesosystem is described as the interrelations among two or more microsystems that influence the developing person. For example, for a student, the mesosystem may include the interactions between home and school demonstrated as shared decision-making between parents and teachers.10

Researchers developed a Cultural-Ecological Model predicated on the position that student outcomes are impacted by social and emotional experiences that shape their interaction with and response to elements not only within schools, but extended to the study of influences outside of the school, such as the neighborhood and family.11 The research included in this book on the psychology of school climate is based in large part on the Cultural-Ecological Model, but with the view of multiple school and community settings from around the world. School climate refers to the characteristics of a school’s environment that, according to Brand, influences students’ academic and social development.12 The quality of teacher-student relationships and student-student 9

Carolyn S. Anderson, “The Search for School Climate: A Review of Research,” Review of Educational Research, 52, No. 3 (1982): 368-420, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1170423. 10 Tamika P. LaSalle, Joel Meyers, Kristen Varjas, and Andrew Roach, “A Cultural-Ecological Model of School Climate,” International Journal of School and Educational Psychology, 3, no. 3 (2015): 157-166. doi:10.1080/21683603.2015.1047550. 11 Ibid. 12 Stephen Brand, Robert Felner, Anne Seitsinger, Amy Burns, and Natalie Bolton, “A Large Scale Study of the Assessment of the Social Environment of Middle and Secondary Schools: The Validity and Utility of Teachers' Ratings of School Climate, Cultural Pluralism, and Safety Problems for Understanding School Effects

4

Chapter One

relationships, academic achievement and support for learning, how connected students feel to the school, the safety and security students experience in school, and the physical surroundings of the school building and campus are dimensions of school climate. The National School Climate Center defines school climate as, “The quality and character of school life as it relates to norms and values, interpersonal relations and social interactions, and organizational processes and structures.” 13 What does that mean? If students do not feel safe at school, do not feel welcomed at school, do not receive respect and are not given opportunities to learn, cannot connect with others or engage in conversations, cannot learn from their mistakes, do not interact with peers and adults, do not have opportunities to be creative, and seldom feel safe and secure, they will not meet their social and academic potential, and they will not develop emotionally, mentally, physically or learn positive social lessons that are essential to their overall well-being and full intellectual and social development. Loukas (2007) wrote, School environments vary greatly. Whereas some schools feel friendly, inviting, and supportive, others feel exclusionary, unwelcoming, and even unsafe. The feelings and attitudes that are elicited by a school’s environment are the school climate. Although it is difficult to provide a concise definition for school climate, most researchers agree that it is a multidimensional construct that includes physical, mental, social, and academic dimensions.14

According to James and Jones, climate is an experientially based description of what people see and feel is happening to them in an organizational situation: practices, policies, procedures, routines, norms, interactions, and consequences.15 As we explore our memory palace, our recollection of the school experience and the thoughts and feelings that permeate those memories, we are reliving school climate. What evokes our thoughts and mental pictures and almost visceral feelings of school is from and School Improvement,” Journal of School Psychology, 46, no. 5 (2008):507535. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2007.12.001. 13 National School Climate Center, What is School Climate and Why is it Important? (New York: NSCC, 2015), www.schoolclimate.org. 14 Alexandra Loukas, “What is School Climate?” National Association of Elementary School Principals, Leadership Compass, 5, no. 1 (2007, Fall): 1-3, https://www.naesp.org/resources/2/Leadership_Compass/2007/LC2007v5n1a4.pdf. 15 Lawrence R. James and Allen P. Jones, “Organizational Climate: A Review of Theory and Research,” Psychological Bulletin, 81, no.12 (1974): 1096-1112. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0037511.

Introduction

5

our experiences with school climate. Adding the physical, social, and academic dimensions noted by Loukas to the experientially based descriptions listed by James and Jones, together they form the basis for describing and understanding the powerful and lasting impact of school climate. Way, Reddy, and Rhodes found that a positive school climate improves a wide range of emotional and mental health outcomes, because all of the following matter: the school’s physical appearance; orderliness, comfort and safety; the types, frequency and quality of the interaction between and among students and teachers and staff; the quality of instruction and the appropriateness of instruction; the availability of physical, academic, and social emotional resources.16 Understanding more about these elements is essential to understanding the importance of school climate on the lives of children. John Dewey says, “Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself.”17 What students and teachers face in school each day because of school climate is indeed “life itself.” So much of the importance of school climate is linked to human motivation, and the elements that motivate people. Motivation is what causes people to act. It is the process that moves people to meet their needs, react to challenges, respond to fear, and drives them to engage with others or a task or become detached. In an article by Pretorius and de Villiers, they wrote, For the development of healthy schools, with specific focus on academic emphasis, it is recommended that learners' lack of motivation be investigated; that school projects be introduced for the improvement of learner achievement (mastery); that motivation be stimulated, and that educator training on the impact of educator expectations on learner achievement be developed. It follows from these conclusions that perceptions of school climate are important because they may have a positive or negative impact on the implementation of change in schools, and on educators' job satisfaction, motivation, productivity and well-being in general, as well on learners' motivation and ability to achieve.18 16

Niobe Way, Ranjini Reddy, and Jean Rhodes, “Students’ Perceptions of School Climate During the Middle School Years: Associations with Trajectories of Psychological and Behavioral Adjustment,” American Journal of Community Psychology, 40 (2007): 194-213. doi:10.1007/s10464-007-9143-y. 17 John Dewey. “Self-Realization as the Moral Ideal,” The Philosophical Review, Volume 2 (1893). 18 Stephanus Pretorius and Elsabe de Villiers, “Educators’ Perceptions of School Climate and Health in Selected Primary Schools,” South African Journal of Education, 29, no. 1 (2009): 88-99. doi:10.1590/S0256-01002009000100003.

6

Chapter One

Motivation cannot be separated from one’s environment. Motivation cannot be discussed or considered without also connecting the person with his environment. Motivation experts identify three major components of motivation: activation, persistence, and intensity.19 Activation is what initiates a behavior; persistence is the continuing effort toward a goal (positive or negative); and intensity is the vigor, concentration, and determination to pursue a goal (positive or negative). The definition of school climate in real terms provides a good measure of the important interaction between environment and motivation. If a student does not feel safe at school, what behavior is motivated? Most likely, the student is motivated to avoid school, or more precisely, to avoid students that he perceives are a threat, or perhaps certain parts of the school building threaten the student’s sense of safety and security. The motivation shifts from positive behavior to a survival outcome–a more basic motivation to survive by avoidance. If a student feels isolated in his school environment, where the school climate does not encourage positive student interaction where bullying and intimidation, for example, are more the norm than the exception, the student’s motivation is to limit interaction with classmates and avoid the normal risk-taking that is part of learning how to develop social skills. The student may frequently complain of headaches or other psychosomatic complaints, and may ask his parents if he can transfer to another school. This component of motivation–persistence is often related to a negative school climate and the strong motivation to persistently seek another option, another school with a different school climate, for example. In extreme cases, the motivation and persistence, driven by the activation of fear, frustration, and perhaps even anger, can motivate students in a hostile school climate to seek relief through retribution or self-destructive behavior. If adults are asked to recall their school experiences, their school experience recollection can be a visceral recall, depending in large part on the memory of their school’s climate. Seldom will an adult recall courses or class schedules, but they will recall the condition of the school, how many friends they had or did not have, the smell of the school, how they felt walking into the school, the interactions between students and the attitude of the teachers and other staff members, and whether they felt connected with anyone at the school. Those retrievals from memory are school climate-based. That is how profound school climate is on the formation of 19

Don H. Hockenbury and Sandra E. Hockenbury, Discovering Psychology, 5th ed. (New York: MacMillan, 2010).

Introduction

7

personality and motivation, and, thus, academic and social emotional outcomes. Maurice wrote, “All over the world, educators are recognizing that creating a school culture and climate that genuinely engages and supports all students is essential to increasing students' achievement and preventing students from dropping out.”20 In William Ouchi’s book, How Good is Your School, a successful high school principal answered the question “How do you tell a good school?” with this: From the moment I approach the outside of a school, I begin to notice things. Is the school clean? Did the custodian clean the hallways? Does the security guard or other staff members greet me warmly? Do they know their role and procedures? Are there parents in the school–do they look happy to be there and engaged? Are the kids smiling? What’s the tenor of the building? Do the secretaries have the ‘disease’ where they look down, not at you?21

The principal describes in realistic terms the dimensions of school climate. Schools with high suspension rates, poor student and staff attendance, low parent participation, little community involvement, and which are both unclean and unsafe are schools that will not benefit from school improvement strategies unless they include means and efforts to change the school’s climate for students and teachers. In his book, The Management of a City School, Arthur C. Perry wrote, The order, the industry, and the culture of our schools, though indirect and often unconscious, are yet efficient and ever-present moral influences which we cannot well overestimate. Granting this, it is evidently incumbent upon the principal to develop in his school a maximum of morally effective order, industry and culture.22

20

Maurice J. Elias, “School Climate that Promotes Student Voice,” Principal Leadership, 11, no. 1 (2010): 22-27, http://www.nassp.org/Content.aspx?topic=School_Climate_That_Promotes_Stude nt_Voice. 21 William Ouchi, Making Schools Work: A Revolutionary Plan to Get Your Children the Education They Need (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2008). 22 Arthur C. Perry, The Management of a City School (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1908).

8

Chapter One

In 1916, when John Dewey declared education is life itself, he also pointed out the importance of the social group and the individual’s need and necessity to be a part of the social group in a meaningful and interactive way.23 The social climate in the group environment could shape the individual for a lifetime, according to Dewey. In 1961, Emile Durkheim, the imminent sociologist, expanded on Dewey’s social connectivity when he wrote, We see in the organization of the family the logically necessary expression of human sentiments inherent in every conscience; we are reversing the true order of facts. On the contrary, it is the social organization of the relations of kinship which has determined the respective sentiments of parents and children.24

It was also in 1961 when John Michael referred to the social organization’s impact on decision-making and career choices.25 He made the connection between the climate of a school and the likelihood that students from schools with a positive school climate (defined as schools with adults who supported, academically challenged, and nurtured students) would attend college. Michael cited the research at that time showing the prediction of college attendance was tied to student ability and family background. But he also noted that the number of students attending college varied among high schools. According to Michael, Some schools seldom produce a college-bound senior, while others contribute a disproportionately large number of seniors to the college rolls. The fluctuation of college-entrance rates from school to school is not adequately explained by inspecting variations in the individual attributes, ability and family background. Rather, the amount of college attendance is related to the high school’s characteristics.26

23

John Dewey, Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1916). 24 Emile Durkheim, Moral Education: A Study in the Theory and Application of the Sociology of Education, trans. by Everett K. Wilson and Henry Schnurer (New York: The Free Press, 1961). 25 John A. Michael, “High School Climates and Plans for Entering College,” The Public Opinion Quarterly, 25, no. 4 (1961): 585-595, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2746294. 26 Ibid.

Introduction

9

The crosswalk between child development elements, such as social emotional learning and school climate, is important to understanding the impact of the learning environment on children. In the 1960s at Yale School of Medicine’s Child Study Center, James Comer discussed the significance of environment on children. He wrote, “The contrast between a child’s experience at home and those in school deeply affects the child’s psychosocial development and this in turn shapes academic achievement.”27 To study this relationship, the Center worked with two low income elementary schools in New Haven, Connecticut with a history of poor student achievement, significant student discipline issues, and poor student attendance. One of the first strategies they utilized was to form a team at each school that included teachers, parents and the principal; and later a mental health worker was added. The management team, the equivalent of a school climate team, made decisions on issues related to academics, behavior, social interaction programs, and school operations. Within a decade, the two schools were topping national averages in student academic achievement, primarily because school climate improved, which resulted in lower truancy rates, fewer discipline problems, and more focus on the needs of all students through universal screening and the identification of the individual needs of students–the Pyramid Model (a systematic decision-making process that provides levels of support matched to the level of student needs).28 The results captured national attention and the two schools became examples of social emotional learning and provided a strong nexus between social emotional learning and the climate of the school.29 From this work, the K-12 New Haven Social Development program was founded to advocate for a framework that allows schools to incorporate social emotional learning into schools as part of school climate development. The researcher found that the effectiveness of social emotional learning can be impacted negatively by a school’s climate. Conversely, efforts to improve relationships and the operations of a school can increase 27

James Comer, Yale School of Medicine’s Child Study Center, 1960. http://childstudycenter.yale.edu/. Dr. Comer is the Maurice Falk Professor of Child Psychiatry at the Yale University School of Medicine's Child Study Center, and has been a Yale medical faculty member since 1968. During these years, he has concentrated his career on promoting a focus on child development as a way of improving schools. 28 George W. Noblit, Carol E. Malloy, and William Malloy, The Kids Got Smarter: Case Studies of Successful Comer Schools (Hampton Press, 2001). 29 Ibid.

10

Chapter One

opportunities for children to feel connected at school–where they do not feel socially or emotionally isolated. From the efforts to promote social emotional learning and improving school climate, the Collaborative to Advance Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL) was founded.30 It has supported several projects to use what is known about social emotional learning to develop prevention programs for mental health, substance abuse, and violence, with a focus on healthy choices, healthy relationships, and healthy environments. According to CASEL, Social emotional learning involves the processes through which children and adults acquire and effectively apply the knowledge, attitudes and skills necessary to understand and manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain positive relationships, and make responsible decisions.”31

Social emotional learning that is effective should include self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, responsible decision-making, and effective interaction with the surroundings (climate), according to CASEL. All of these elements are essential components and results of a positive school climate. Sometimes the effects of school climate get lost in the discussions of social emotional learning, but the relationship is too important to ignore or omit; it is a symbiotic relationship. The importance of social emotional learning was taken to a higher level of interest by the widely popular book written by Daniel Goleman, Emotional Intelligence, in 1995.32 Goleman made the connection between social emotional learning and one’s environment: “The emotional brain responds to an event more quickly than the thinking brain.”33 He also captured the critically important element of understanding the early impact on children: “Emotional intelligence begins to develop in the earliest years. All the small exchanges children have with their parents, teachers, and with one another carry emotional messages.”34 The number and quality of these exchanges are frequently determined by the climate of the school 30

Tim Shriver, Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL), 1994. www.casel.org. In 1994 CASEL was founded following a series of meetings with researchers, practitioners and child advocates about children’s social and educational development. 31 Ibid. 32 Daniel Goleman, Emotional Intelligence (New York, Bantam Books, 1995). 33 Ibid. 34 Ibid.

Introduction

11

and home and how effectively or ineffectively children interact with and understand their environments they encounter every day, everywhere. This becomes even more critical for children who have mental health issues; for example, students experiencing post-traumatic stress from complex trauma come to the school setting with possibly underdeveloped executive functions in the prefrontal cortex, which makes them more likely to be negatively affected by a school climate that does allow children opportunities to connect with others, engage in school activities and functions, and build relationships with other students and adults in the school. Therefore, their propensity to replace “thinking” with “doing” and reacting instead of responding increases the likelihood of failure in school and a disproportionate number of discipline referrals. The field of organizational psychology has for many years addressed the culture of the workplace, and its dynamic effect on employee morale, productivity, and retention. For reasons not clearly understood, this recognition of workplace culture has not been transferred to schools in a widespread, meaningful way, which is unfortunate because much can be learned from organizational psychology. Many of the business turnaround models and strategies and the stories of these successful efforts have and continue to focus on changing or improving the workplace culture, which in turn affects the behavior and productivity of employees. Thompson and Luthans offer the seven characteristics of culture that can be applied to school place culture and climate: (1) culture = behavior; (2) culture is learned; (3) culture is learned through interaction; (4) subcultures form through rewards; (5) people shape the culture; (6) culture is negotiated; (7) culture is difficult to change.35 According to Thompson and Luthans, people in the workplace learn and display behavior that they are exposed to on a regular basis–negative or positive. How employees interact with one another is often determined by how the supervisors interact with the employees, and that interaction has the “subordinate” effect–where the negative behavior and attitude is pushed down the ranks of the organization, creating a negative climate that results in a lack of comradeship and mutual support in the organization. The organizational psychology model offers an explanation of how subcultures are created in organizations. All individuals have needs and some of the basic needs are belonging, interacting, and receiving feedback from others. If a person does not feel like he be35

K.R. Thompson and F. Luthans, “Organizational Culture: A Behavioral Perspective,” in B. Schneider (Ed.), Organizational Climate and Culture (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990).

12

Chapter One

longs and only interacts with a small number of colleagues or friends, and there is either no feedback or negative feedback from supervisors or other colleagues or friends, the person feels driven to find a subculture of like individuals. These subcultures can over time undermine the strength of the organization. Another way of explaining this is to understand the relationship of culture and climate: culture is the behavior of people in the organization and climate is why they behave that way. This applies to any type of organization or institution, including schools. This explains in large part why students gravitate to cliques and even gangs that represent the subculture of a school. Many of the organizational psychology components are reflective of Albert Bandura’s work in social psychology. In a landmark study, Bandura, Dorothea Ross, and Sheila Ross found that 88 percent of the children who viewed adults strike and kick a doll imitated the aggressive behavior, and eight months later 40 percent of the same children reproduced the violent behavior observed in the doll experiment.36 Bandura developed the Triadic Responsibility Model that triangulated overt behavior, personal factors, and the environment.37 The environment component of the triad includes the physical surroundings of the individual that stimulates, stifles, or otherwise influences the behavior and attitude of individuals. Bandura’s triad has been referred to as reciprocal determinism. Lee describes the interaction of the triad components: Reciprocal determinism suggests that individuals function as a result of a dynamic and reciprocal interaction among their behavior, environment, and personal characteristics. Personal characteristics include one's thoughts, emotions, expectations, beliefs, goals, and so forth. Behavior is conceptualized as a person's skills and actions. Lastly, environment is considered to be a person's social and physical surroundings. All three systems interact with one another; therefore, a change in one will influence the others as well. Reciprocal determinism indicated that people do have a say in their future, because of reciprocal interactions.38

Reciprocal interactions suggest that changing a person’s environment significantly can trigger changes in personal characteristics and behavior. 36

Albert Bandura, Dorothea Ross, and Sheila Ross, “Transmission of Aggression through Imitation of Aggressive Models,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, (1961): 575-582, http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Bandura/bobo.htm. 37 Ibid. 38 Steven W. Lee, Encyclopedia of School Psychology (Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2005).

Introduction

13

Research on school climate and issues directly related to school climate abound in several countries and in many settings, from small schools to large schools. The purpose of the research review is to better understand the dynamics of school climate, including operationally defining school climate and the impact of school climate on students and teachers both in the academic domain as well as the social emotional domain. In A Review of School Climate Research, Thapa, Cohen, Guffey, and HigginsD’Alessandro categorize the research on school climate into the following categories, or what they referred to as the “dimensions of school climate”: (1) Safety, (2) Relationships, (3) Teaching and Learning, (4) Institutional Environment, and (5) the School Improvement Process. 39 An extensive review of international research on school climate suggests 12 research dimensions of school climate: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

Student Achievement Social Emotional Connectedness Teachers Leadership Student Discipline and Safety Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports Physical Health and Activities of Students Institutional Environment (School Building and Grounds) Assessment of School Climate Racial and Ethnic Climate Population-Based Effects of School Climate

In addition to these primary dimensions of school climate research, there are other unique research sub-dimensions that offer valuable insights into school climate, such as alternative educational settings and dropout prevention; racial issues; the influence of community on school climate; social emotional development; sexual orientation; and others. Jerome Freiburg, author of School Climate, wrote: “School climate is like the air we breathe–it tends to go unnoticed until something is seriously

39

Amrit Thapa, Johnathon Cohen, Shawn Guffey, and Amy HigginsD’Alessandro, “A Review of School Climate Research,” Review of Educational Research, 83, no. 3 (2013): 357-385. doi:10.3102/0034654313483907.

14

Chapter One

wrong.” 40 When school climate goes wrong, students and school staff members suffer the consequences. Whether it is the result of a sudden tragic event or the long-term ill, insidious effects of a negative school climate, the impact on students, parents, and staff members can be devastating. Educators, teachers, and leader training universities and colleges, parents, child advocates, public education advocates, and other stakeholders need to understand and learn about the importance and influence of school climate on children from preschool to secondary school and even at the postsecondary level. A positive school climate can help all students by stabilizing the school environment and creating a norm of safety, security, engagement, and positive relationships. A positive school climate can also help students such as gifted and talented children reach new heights, help children with mental health issues discover care and support from peers and adults, and help children of all ages, ethnic groups, and family backgrounds find a place in their world that is stable, secure, welcoming, supportive, and with high expectations. However, teachers and school administrators are not often provided with a thorough understanding of the dynamics and importance of school climate. Christopher Peal wrote about the challenge facing school principals with regard to learning about school climate: With so much to read and to digest, it is easy to become overwhelmed. The average principal could spend a year pouring through mountains of available data, studying the implications of assessment results, and graphing their intricacies in multicolored Excel files. Add a few hours a day to devote to reading the latest research, a couple more days to attend a workshop or conference, and the school year has slipped away.41

It is important in this book to recognize the needs of the reader and therefore to review important research on school climate in a summative and explanatory manner that will help readers understand the dimensions of school climate, the influences of school climate, the interactions of school climate and social emotional development, the measurement of school climate, and how measures can be taken to improve school climate. 40

Jerome Freiburg, School Climate: Measuring, Improving and Sustaining Healthy Learning Environments (Philadelphia: Routledge-Falmer, Taylor and Francis Group, 1999). 41 Christopher Peal, “In the Real World: The Big-ness of School Climate,” Leadership Compass, 5, no. 1 (2007): 1-2.

Introduction

15

It is also important to understand how other elements of school climate influence child development and academic success.

Chapter One: School Climate Introduction Summary Points Every psychological event depends upon the state of the person and at the same time on the environment, although their relative importance depends on circumstances. People move each day from one climate to another, even within the same organization. The climate at work, school, playgrounds, restaurants, places of worship, and other places constantly interact with our personalities, beliefs, fears, expectations, and physical and mental health and affect our lives in powerful ways. School climate is a widely used term that refers to the characteristics of a school’s environment that influences students’ academic and social development. Motivation is what causes people to act. It is the process that moves people to meet their needs, react to challenges, respond to fear, and drives them to engage with others or a task or become detached. Motivation cannot be discussed or considered without also connecting the person with his environment. Motivation experts identify three major components of motivation: activation, persistence, and intensity. The crosswalk between child development elements, such as social emotional learning and school climate, is important to understanding the impact of the learning environment on children. Yale School of Medicine’s Child Study Center study found that social emotional learning and school climate are interrelated.42 The effectiveness of social emotional learning can be impacted negatively by a school’s climate, and conversely the effort to improve relationships and the operations of a school can increase opportunities for children to feel connected at school–where they do not feel socially or emotionally isolated. Social emotional learning that is effective should include selfawareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, re42

George W. Noblit, Carol E. Malloy, and William Malloy, The Kids Got Smarter: Case Studies of Successful Comer Schools (Hampton Press, 2001).

16







43

Chapter One

sponsible decision-making, and effective interaction with one’s surroundings. Emotional intelligence begins to develop in the earliest years. All the small exchanges children have with their parents, teachers, and with one another carry emotional messages. Language development is essential to behavior. If a person does not feel like he belongs and only interacts with a small number of colleagues or friends and there is either no feedback or negative feedback from supervisors or other colleagues or friends, the person feels driven to find a subculture of like individuals. Culture is the behavior of people in the organization and climate is why they behave that way. Albert Bandura developed the Triadic Responsibility Model that triangulated overt behavior, personal factors, and the environment and is called Reciprocal Determinism, which suggests that individuals function as a result of a dynamic and reciprocal interaction among their behavior, environment, and personal characteristics.43 Changing one can impact the other two. Dimensions of school climate include (1) Safety, (2) Relationships, (3) Teaching and Learning, (4) Institutional Environment, and (5) the School Improvement Process.44

Bandura, Ross, and Ross, “Transmission of Aggression,” 575-582. Thapa, Cohen, Guffey, and Higgins-D’Alessandro, “A Review of School Climate Research,” 357-385. 44

CHAPTER TWO SCHOOL CLIMATE AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

“Creating school cultures and school climates that genuinely engage and support all students is essential to increasing student achievement.” —M.J. Elias and N.M. Haynes1

Thirty years of research on student achievement indicated that teachers, school leaders, parent involvement, nutrition, language, social emotional development, and many other factors positively and negatively relate to student achievement outcomes. Student achievement and school climate have also been linked together-sometimes in a causal nexus and sometimes in a correlational nexus. Research on student achievement and school climate includes both causation and correlation across different types of schools, different populations of students, and in different cultures. MacNeil, Prater, and Busch studied the effects of school culture and climate on student achievement.2 The sample included 29 schools located in a suburban school district in Texas. Academic test results from 24,684 students were used as the bases for the school climate ratings. Teachers in the schools rated school climate using the Organizational Health Inventory (OHI).3 The researchers developed a method to investigate whether stu-

1

M.J. Elias and N.M. Haynes, “Social competence, social support, and academic achievement in minority, low-income, urban elementary school children,” School Psychology Quarterly, 23, no. 4 (2008): 474-495. 2 Angus MacNeil, Doris Prater, and Steve Busch, “The Effects of School Culture and Climate on Student Achievement,” International Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory and Practice, 12, no. 1 (2009): 73-84, http://donnieholland.wiki.westga.edu/file/view/school+culture+climate+%26+achi evement.pdf. 3 Wayne K Hoy, and John A. Fedman, “Organizational Health: The Concept and Its Measure,” Journal of Research and Development in Education, 20 (1987): 417435.

18

Chapter Two

dent achievement at the school level in different levels of academic performance, recognized as Exemplary, Recognized, and Acceptable, differed based on school climate elements, as measured by the following 10 dimensions of the OHI: 1. Goal focus is the ability of persons, groups, or organizations to have clarity, acceptance, and support of goals and objectives. 2. Communication adequacy is when information is relatively distortion free and travels both vertically and horizontally across the boundaries of an organization. 3. Optimal power equalization is the ability to maintain a relatively equitable distribution of influence between members of the work unit and the leader. 4. Resource utilization is the ability to involve and coordinate the efforts of members of the work unit effectively and with a minimal sense of strain. 5. Cohesiveness is when persons, groups or organizations have a clear sense of identity. Members feel attracted to membership in the organization. They want to stay with it, be influenced by it, and exert their own influence within it. 6. Morale is when a person, group, or organization has feelings of well-being, satisfaction, and pleasure. 7. Innovativeness is the ability to be and allow others to be inventive, diverse, creative, and risk-takers. 8. Autonomy is when a person, group, or organization can maintain ideals and goals as well as meet needs whilst managing external demands. 9. Adaptation is the ability to tolerate stress and maintain stability while being responsive to the demands of the external environment. 10. Problem-solving adequacy is an organization’s ability to perceive problems and solve them using minimal energy. The problems stay solved and the problem-solving mechanism of the organization is maintained and/or strengthened. The OHI’s 10 dimensions are consistent with the elements that define school climate. In the study, there were three academic achievement levels that reflected the levels of student outcomes: Exemplary schools are high achievement schools, based on standardized assessments; Recognized schools are schools performing at or above student achievement expecta-

School Climate and Student Achievement

19

tions; and Acceptable schools are those meeting minimal student achievement performance levels.4 The results of the study found significant differences on all 10 dimensions of the OHI. The Exemplary schools outǦ performed Acceptable schools and showed positive trends in each of the OHI dimensions. There was a significant difference in the student achievement levels between Exemplary and Recognized schools. Also, there was a statistically significant difference between Recognized and Acceptable schools’ student achievement and school climate, with Recognized schools outǦperforming Acceptable schools on OHI dimensions, especially on Goal Focus and Adaptation. According to the researchers, the findings of this study “suggest that students achieve higher scores on standardized tests in schools with healthy learning environments.” 5 The dimensions of a highly engaging and safe and supportive school climate are essential elements that allow students to maintain the interest and motivation level necessary to be successful in school. Haynes, Comer, and Hamilton-Lee studied the effects of a school improvement program on student achievement, as well as on other factors, such as student, teacher, and parent perceptions of school and classroom climate and student attendance.6 Additionally, the study considered whether school climate could be enhanced through parental involvement. The study included 306 randomly selected students in Grades 3 through 5 from 14 elementary schools. It also included 98 teachers and 276 parents. The results indicated that school improvement as measured by student achievement is strongly dependent on the impact of teachers and parents and their perceptions of school climate. The schools that implemented school improvement programs that involved teachers and parents in efforts to improve school climate showed significant improvement in student academic outcomes. Student and parent perceptions of the classroom and school climate in schools that did not implement school improvement programs with strategies to improve school climate were significantly more negative. School and classroom climate improvement were an important component of overall school improvement programs. Also, those schools that linked school improvement with school climate showed significantly

4

Ibid. Ibid. 6 Norris Haynes, James P. Comer, and Muriel Hamilton-Lee, “School Climate Enhancement through Parental Involvement,” Journal of School Psychology, 27, no. 1 (1989): 87-90. doi:10.1016/0022-4405(89)90034-4. 5

20

Chapter Two

greater improvement in student achievement and attendance, especially when parents and teachers were involved in school improvement efforts. In a study by McEvoy and Welker, the relationship between antisocial behavior, academic failure, and school climate was examined. 7 The researchers stated that, Researchers have demonstrated a strong correlation between antisocial behavior and academic failure among students. Yet current educational programs designed to modify one or both of these patterns of conduct tend to be limited in at least two fundamental ways. First, they tend to treat conditions associated with academic achievement as separate from those associated with violent or other antisocial behavior. Second, they often focus narrowly on modifying selected cognitions or personality characteristics of the individual (e.g., changing attitudes and beliefs). Yet both antisocial behavior and academic failure are context specific: each occurs within a climate in which conditions can be identified that reasonably predict problematic behavior and can be modified to reduce such behavior.8

The researchers used the epidemiological model of predictability and determinants to convey the essential components of the distinction between the effectiveness of prevention and intervention programs being dependent on the ability to correctly, significantly, and efficiently modify school climates to impact academic achievement and reduce antisocial behavior identify. They found that a shared vision between and among teachers, staff members, and leadership was important to a positive school climate. This led to a collective expectation of attitude and behavior that supported student achievement. The researchers suggested that student achievement improvements were dependent on elements of a positive school climate and both were dependent on a shared vision of the school that addresses the needs of the students, teachers, and staff. In a study of school climate that touched on school climate in a socioeconomically depressed school, it was found that school climate depended significantly on teacher beliefs and other related factors. The authors of the study, Brown and Medway, looked at a school effectively serving AfricanAmerican students in a South Carolina school system that produced posi-

7

Alan McEvoy and Robert Welker, “Antisocial Behavior, Academic Failure, and School Climate: A Critical Review,” Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8, no. 3 (2000): 130-140. doi: 10.1177/106342660000800301. 8 Ibid.

School Climate and Student Achievement

21

tive achievement outcomes with poor and minority students.9 The study examined the roles of school climate, teacher expectations, and instructional practices on the positive student academic outcomes. They found that, The school was characterized by an emphasis on high student expectations, school staff cohesiveness, engaging instruction, high parent involvement, and multicultural instruction integrated with the curriculum. The practices identified are consistent with the literature on effective American schools (positive climate and positive teacher-student interaction, etc.); and the practices are key aspects of the sound instruction of poor and minority children. Teachers stated that teacher education programs did not prepare them to teach these students and that they had to learn this on the job.10

The findings highlight the importance of attitude and expectations within a school’s climate, but student achievement outcomes are also dependent on relationships where engaging students in the learning process becomes the expectation of the school. Interpersonal relationships appear to be a key component in the link between school climate and student achievement. According to the National School Climate Center (2015), “Interpersonal relationships are the foundation for learning and human development.”11 A study by Tschannen-Moran, Parish, and DiPaola examined the interplay between interpersonal relationships and student achievement and found that, “This study of school climate underscores the importance of the quality of interpersonal relationships in a school to student achievement.”12 The interaction and relationships between and among students and teachers is an important component of what is required for students to excel in school, because they first must feel welcomed, safe, and secure, which is more likely to occur within a school climate built on relationships, because from relationships trust can be developed. 9

Kimberly E. Brown and Frederick J. Medway, “School Climate and Teacher Beliefs in a School Effectively Serving Poor South Carolina African-American Students: A Case Study,” Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, no. 4 (2007) 529540. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.002. 10 Ibid. 11 National School Climate Center, “Interpersonal Relationships – Understanding,” www.schoolclimate.org/guidelines/interpersonal_relationships.php. 12 Megan Tschannen-Moran, Jennifer Parish, and Michael DiPaola, “School Climate: The Interplay Between Interpersonal Relationships and Student Achievement,” Journal of School Leadership, 16, no. 4 (2006): 386-415.

22

Chapter Two

Chen and Weikert studied the relationship between student background, school climate, school disorder, and student achievement.13 They tested a school disorder and student achievement model based upon a school climate framework. The model was applied to 212 New York City middle schools using the Structural Equations Modeling Analysis method, which is frequently used in the social sciences for its ability to isolate observational error from the measurement of latent variables. The researchers found that, “The analysis shows that the model fits the data well based upon test statistics and goodness of fit indices. The model accounts for 82% of the variance of student achievement scores on state standardized examinations.”14 The study suggested that school disorder typically associated with lower levels of socioeconomic conditions can be mediated through positive school climate. Additionally, it was found that lower levels of student socioeconomic status are associated with “lower levels of academic achievement directly, and indirectly mediated through school disorder. School disorder affects student academic achievement directly and indirectly mediated by student attendance rate.”15 The evidence of the study strongly suggests that a positive school climate reduces school disorder and consequently improves student attendance, which is critical to improving student achievement. Student achievement and student satisfaction with the school are core beliefs in the relationship between school climate and effective schools. Griffith took a broad look at the school climate dimensions of “social order” and “social action” as he studied the perception of students about school climate within those two dimensions.16 Griffith’s study used a sample of 25,087 students enrolled in 117 elementary schools to measure the impact of social order and social action on students. According to Griffith, School climate dimensions most immediate to the student showed the strongest relations to both student self-report academic performance and student satisfaction, and these relations were generally the same across 13

Greg Chen and Lynne A. Weikert, “Student Background, School Climate, School Disorder, and Student Achievement: An Empirical Study of New York City’s Middle Schools,” Journal of School Violence, 7, no. 4 (2008): 3-20. doi:10.1080/15388220801973813. 14 Ibid. 15 Ibid. 16 James Griffith, “School Climate as Social Order and Social Action: A MultiLevel Analysis of Public Elementary School Student Perceptions,” School Psychology of Education, 2, no. 3 (1999): 339-369. doi:10.1023/A:1009657422344.

School Climate and Student Achievement

23

schools. As predicted, expressive support as opposed to instrumental support was more beneficial in terms of self-reported academic performance to students in schools having proportionally more socio-economically disadvantaged students.17

According to many experts across the nation, closing the student achievement gap that separates economically disadvantaged and minority students from student achievers of the majority is one of the most important issues facing America’s public schools. Additionally, it is important for schools to consider racial and ethnic relations within school climates. Mattison and Aber looked at the association of school climate regarding racial issues with student achievement and behavioral outcomes by investigating the relationship between school racial climate and students’ self-reports of academic and discipline outcomes.18 One of the important components of school climate is the relationship between and among races and ethnic groups. One school climate measure that can focus directly on this relationship is a racial climate survey (RCS). Using an RCS developed for high school students, data was gathered from 382 African-American and 1,456 European-American students regarding their perceptions of racial climate.19 The researchers reported that, “Positive perceptions of school racial climate were associated with higher student achievement and fewer discipline problems. Results suggest careful attention should be given to the racial climate of high schools within the broader context of school climate.”20 Schools that need to develop school improvement plans because of underperformance on student achievement tests must include school climate improvement strategies or they will not likely reach their goals and they are even less likely to close the student achievement gaps across all minority students. Research suggested that classroom climate can be an important and perhaps even a casual variable that accounts for some of the variance in

17

Ibid. Erica Mattison and Mark Aber, “Closing the Achievement Gap: The Association of Racial Climate with Achievement and Behavioral Outcomes,” American Journal of Community Psychology, 40, no. 1-2 (2007): 1-12. doi:10.1007/s10464-0079128-x. 19 Ibid. 20 Ibid. 18

24

Chapter Two

student performance in subject areas.21 To test this notion, Goh, Young, and Fraser studied the psychosocial climate and student performance in elementary mathematics classrooms using a multilevel analysis. 22 The researchers investigated the perceived psychosocial climate and student outcomes among a sample of 1,512 students in Grade 5 mathematics classes in Singapore. The findings suggested that a correlation exists between student performance in mathematics in elementary schools and the school’s classroom climates. They used multiple linear regression and hierarchical linear modeling, and reported that, “A comparison of findings from the two approaches suggests (a) the existence of associations between outcomes and environment and (b) the usefulness of incorporating both data analysis methods in learning-environment research.”23 The effective school will examine the classroom climate and the overall school climate to determine what should be done to improve both. Many times the health of a school’s climate is manifested in the classroom. Anderson, Hamilton, and Hattie also studied classroom climate and its association with the motivation to complete tasks, which was linked to student academic performance.24 Motivation factors related to student performance included participation in class and engagement in class activities with teacher support. A lack of motivation impacted student performance and school climate impacted motivation. For some children, school failure is attributed to a lack of motivation. The researchers sought to test this theory and how it related to school climate. They conducted a study of motivation from an ecological perspective–how students interact with a supportive, engaging classroom climate, and found that, Unlike much of the motivational literature that measures motivation in terms of constructs that are assessed largely via self-report, the dependent variables in this study were three measures of more immediate classroom 21

Barry J. Fraser and Darrell L. Fisher, “Predicting Students’ Outcomes from Their Perceptions of Classroom Psychosocial Environment,” American Educational Research Journal, 19, no. 4 (1982b): 498-518. doi:10.3102/00028312019004498. 22 Swee Chiew Goh, Deidra J. Young, and Barry J. Fraser, “Psychosocial Climate and Student Outcomes in Elementary Mathematics Classrooms: A Multilevel Analysis,” The Journal of Experimental Education, 64, no. 1 (Fall 1995): 29-40, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20152470. 23 Ibid. 24 Angelika Anderson, Richard J. Hamilton, and John Hattie, “Classroom Climate and Motivated Behavior in Secondary Schools,” Learning Environment Research, 7 (2004): 211-225.

School Climate and Student Achievement

25

behaviors: participation, self-reported engagement, and task completion. The results show that aspects of classroom climate are significantly related to all of these measures of motivation and achievement.25

The relationship between school and classroom climate and motivation affects student performance on academic tasks. Students that are encouraged to participate in class and actively engage in learning are students who feel motivated within classrooms that are positive and supportive. Being encouraged to participate in class represents a high level of motivation for virtually all students and significantly reduces student misbehavior that stems from boredom and feeling insignificant and ignored or isolated. A study titled Using School Climate Surveys to Categorize Schools and Examine Relationships with School Achievement was designed to examine report card indicators and school climate survey data from students, parents, and teachers for elementary-level schools.26 The purpose of the study was to review the indicators and outcomes of several schools to determine if and how school climate is related to report card indicators and student achievement. The study included 500 schools with the last grade level being fourth grade, fifth grade, or sixth grade. The results of the study found, …Moderate to strong relationships between a variety of achievement indicators and school climate, as measured by the surveys of teachers, students, and parents. The strongest of these were between those items measuring home-school relationship on the teacher survey and absolute rating. The second strongest relationship was between social-physical environment on the parent survey and school absolute rating.27

Student achievement is impacted by school climate, and the impact is even more pronounced, depending on the relationship between the parents and the school. Student achievement discussions cannot logically omit the importance of self-motivation or the personal academic goals of students, but does school climate impact personal academic goal development? Roeser, 25

Ibid. Christine DiStefano, Diane M. Monrad, J. May, Patricia McGuinness, and Tammiee Dickenson, “Using School Climate Surveys to Categorize Schools and Examine Relationships with School Achievement,” Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, April 2007. 27 Ibid. 26

26

Chapter Two

Midgley, and Urdan looked at the perceptions of school climate and early adolescents’ psychological and behavioral functioning in school and the mediating role of student academic goals and belonging.28 Using a sample of 296 eighth-grade middle school students, the researchers examined the role of personal achievement goals and feelings of school belonging in mediating the relation between perceptions of the school psychological environment and school-related beliefs, effects, and achievement. Based on the findings, the researchers stated, Perceiving a task goal structure in middle school was positively related to academic self-efficacy. Perceiving an ability goal structure was related to academic self-consciousness and this relation was mediated through personal relative ability goals. Perceiving positive teacher-student relationships predicted positive school-related effects and this relation was mediated through feelings of school belonging. Feelings of academic efficacy and school belonging in turn were positively related to final-semester academic grades.29

If the school climate is positive and focuses on task completion, academic goals, and positive relationships (particularly positive teacherstudent relationships), then it is much more likely that students will have positive self-awareness about personal academic performance goals and improve their academic outcomes. In another study related to selfperception and motivation within the context of school climate, student and school data were drawn from the National Educational Longitudinal Study of 19,435 students and 997 schools.30 Hierarchical linear modeling techniques were used to examine the relationship between student and administrator perceptions of school climate and student achievement, engagement, and control orientation. The results of the study stated that,

28

Robert W. Roeser, Carol Midgley, and Timothy C. Urdan, “Perceptions of the School Psychological Environment and Early Adolescents’ Psychological and Behavioral Functioning in School: The Mediating Role of Goals and Belonging,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, no. 3 (1996): 408-422, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.522.1750&rep=rep1&ty pe=pdf. 29 Ibid. 30 Michele Gregiore, and James Algina, “Reconceptualizing the Debate on School Climate and Students’ Academic Motivation and Achievement: A Multilevel Analysis,” Paper presented at the American Research Council Annual Conference, New Orleans, LA, 2000.

School Climate and Student Achievement

27

With students' individual background characteristics as well as aggregated socioeconomic status of the schools controlled, authoritarian school climates were associated with lower academic engagement and control perceptions for eighth graders, as well as more differentiating effects of prior grades on their mathematics achievement, a greater gender gap in academic engagement, and increased differentiating of students' socioeconomic status on their mathematics achievement and perceptions of control.31

School climates that were “controlled” by authoritative administrators were less likely to meet the connectedness students and teachers needed in order to feel engaged at school. This seemed to affect girls more than boys. It is a dilemma for school administrators, who at the basic level of responsibility must ensure that schools are safe and orderly. Many of them are so concerned about safety and orderliness that they run schools in an authoritative manner primarily. However, authority does not have to be relinquished when an administrator incorporates elements of school climate such as engagement, connectedness, and relationships. Schools need clear leadership from the principal, but the leadership style of authoritativeness may compromise the quality of school climate and the potential for higher levels of student achievement. Stichter studied school climate perceptions as a measure of a school district’s student achievement goal attainment.32 According to the study, “Factors and their component variables in this study suggest student attitudes about their high school experience are rooted in academic, overall experience, communication, and environmental encounters. As such, these factors reflect school climate constructs consistent with the research.”33 The study found that school improvement based on student achievement can be measured in part by assessing school climate. The linkage was there between the quality of school climate and student academic outcomes, which was the basis for school improvement planning that set goals. According to the researcher, School districts can set general and specific goals which can, in part, be measured using school climate perception data of high school students. The data comparison over four survey cycles provided an opportunity to look at more robust results than what would occur with point-in-time re31

Ibid. Kenneth Stichter, “Student School Climate Perceptions as a Measure of School District Goal Attainment,” Journal of Educational Research, 8, no. 1 (2008): 4465, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ809442.pdf. 33 Ibid. 32

Chapter Two

28

sults only. This approach allows a school district to track the effectiveness of policies and decisions relative to established goals. Long-term goals imply long-term actions, assessment, and reaction in an effort to meet the intent of said goals.34

The complexity of school climate variables in this study emphasized how the academic, social, organizational, and environmental routines of a high school are relational in the perceptions of students. The study variables indicated that school climate is tied to almost every facet of a school, which is why using school climate as a unit of measure is valuable in determining whether a school is and will continue to perform well or not, based on student achievement. The researcher further noted, District-wide school climate data driven by student perceptions may be valuable in addressing the complexity suggested by such goals. But taking such action requires a commitment to maintaining goals and measurement methods for an equal period of time. The payoff is continuous feedback and an opportunity to observe the effects of fine tuning policies and decisions and the relationship between school climate and academic outcomes. 35

These policies and procedures could impact student achievement, as well as other factors, but an important point from the study was the recommendation that schools seek continuous feedback, particularly with school climate indicators, because those can be adjusted according to the feedback without waiting to the end of the school year. Elias asserted that educators from around the world are beginning to fully grasp the importance of school climate and its vital relationship with student achievement and other student outcome.36 Elias stated, Creating school culture and climate that genuinely engages and supports all students is essential to increasing students’ achievement and preventing students from dropping out. Combined with efforts to create a safe, supporting, caring, and challenging school climate and explicitly promote students' social emotional and character development competencies, activities that enhance student voice and engagement are among the most powerful

34

Ibid. Ibid. 36 Elias, “School Climate that Promotes Student Voice,” 22-27. 35

School Climate and Student Achievement

29

tools to reduce the dropout rate and close the academic and opportunity gaps that still plague too many schools.37

In a revealing study by Shindler, Jones, Williams, Taylor, and Cadenas, they explored the connection between student achievement and school climate in a large geographical area of urban schools.38 The study included 21 urban public schools, with the sample being drawn from a geographical area that was representative of ethnic and socioeconomic diversity. A team at each school administered the Alliance for the Study of School Climate’s assessment instrument (SCAI), which includes appearance and physical plant, faculty relations, student interactions, leadership, discipline environment, learning environment, attitude and culture, and school-community relations. A minimum number of 30 students, in addition to a minimum of 10 teachers, 10 staff members, and 10 parents, were required at each school in the study, but most sample sizes were much larger than the minimum levels set for the study, sometimes by as much as 15 percent. In addition to the survey, feedback from focus groups was collected. The academic data used in the study were from the California State Academic Performance Index (API) and the Similar School rating scores.39 The results of the study confirmed a strong relationship between the quality of school climate and academic achievement levels. Overall, at least seven study conclusions were supported by the data. 1. Consistent with previous research, the data showed that the quality of school climate decreased as students moved from the Elementary to Secondary School level. 2. Achievement was shown to be highly correlated to overall mean school climate. 3. Achievement was also shown to correlate with all eight School Climate Assessment Instrument (SCAI) indicators, including a very 37

Ibid. John Shindler, Albert Jones, A. Dee Williams, Clint Taylor, and Hermenia Cadenas, “Exploring the School Climate–Student Achievement Connection: And Making Sense of Why the First Preceded the Second,” Alliance for the Study of School Climate (Los Angeles: California State University, 2014), http://web.calstatela.edu/centers/schoolclimate/. 39 The API Similar Schools Rank compares the test score performance of schools with comparable demographic profiles using a scale of 1 to 10. A school with a low API but high Similar Schools Rank may be more effective than a school with low ranks all around. 38

Chapter Two

30

4.

5.

6.

7.

substantive correlation coefficient for classroom discipline practices. All eight of the climate factors [from the SCAI] at each of the 21 schools tended to be highly inter-related. This suggests that factors are highly inter-dependent. SCAI was positively correlated to Similar School Rating [California’s measure of student achievement at each school]. This suggests that schools with better climates are more effective at promoting the achievement with their students relative to schools with similar students and less functional climates. When socioeconomic status was adjusted for, the correlation between the SCAI scores and the achievement scores grew more prominent. Intra-school data showed similar variation. The experience of climate for students within each school also varied relative to the academic track of the student group. Students in lower performing tracks identified different practices being the norm than their higher track peers, and experienced lower quality climates.40

The study indicated a highly significant correlation between the components of school climate and student achievement. It is also noteworthy that the study found that students in lower performing academic tracks experienced different school climate practices than those students in higher performing academic tracks. The researchers stated further that, “The substantial relationship between school climate and API rating suggests that a conclusion can be drawn that, to a good degree, better school climates led to achievement, and were not simply a byproduct.”41 The relationship between school climate and student achievement was also examined in a study of how a framework for improving school climate, Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS), might be related to academic achievement in a Midwest urban, inner-city middle school. The study covered a 3-year period of time.42 The middle school’s annual student enrollment was 630, with approximately 70 percent of the students being minority, and 80 percent of the students socioeconomically 40

Ibid. Ibid. 42 Stephen T. Lassen, Michael M. Steele, and Wayne Sailor, “The Relationship of School-wide Positive Behavioral Support to Academic Achievement in an Urban Middle School,” Psychology in the Schools, 43, no. 6 (2006): 701-712. doi:10.1002/pits.20177. 41

School Climate and Student Achievement

31

disadvantaged. The study focused on the prevalence of Office Disciplinary Referrals (ODRs), because ODRs represent the basic level of student discipline referrals for all infractions, minor to major, and become a good measure of the source of referrals, as well as the nature of the referrals, and can serve as a measure of school climate. The ODRs can also pinpoint the origin of the referrals; they are important because a lot of discipline data sets only show behaviors where there were consequences such as suspension, while ODRs show all referrals regardless of whether or not there was a discipline consequence. In addition to ODRs, the study’s data elements included suspensions (typically 5 days of suspension or less), standardized test scores, and PBIS treatment fidelity (PBIS fidelity is determined by the use of the School-Wide Evaluation Tool validated by Horner et al.)43 The results of the 3-year study found a significant reduction in ODRs and suspensions, as well as increases in standardized math and reading scores. Further, the study concluded that, Additionally, regression analyses suggested a significant relationship between student problem behavior and academic performance. Treatment adherence to PBIS procedures to improve school climate was significantly correlated with reductions in problem behavior and increases in academic outcomes.44

Jensen conducted a descriptive study of the differences between teachers at high and low-performing (student achievement) Title I elementary schools.45 The study included 257 teachers from 10 high-poverty elementary schools, evenly divided between low-performing (bottom 25 percent in the state) and high-performing (top 25 percent in the state) schools. The aim of the study was to discern any teacher differences in the two types of schools and to identify those differences, if they exist, within the context of the relationship between student achievement and school climate elements. A survey was used, based on “high-yield” teaching influencers that 43

Robert H. Horner, Anne W. Todd, Teri Lewis-Palmer, Larry K. Irvin, George Sugai, and Joseph B. Boland, “The School-wide Evaluation Tool (SET): A Research Instrument for Assessing School-wide Positive Behavior Support,” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6 (2004): 3–12. doi:10.1177/10983007040060010201. 44 Ibid. 45 Eric Jensen, “A Descriptive Study of Differences between Teachers at High and Low Performing Title I Elementary Schools” (dissertation, Fielding Graduate University, 2014).

32

Chapter Two

are related to student achievement. The results of the study indicated that there are factors more important as predictors of student achievement than socioeconomic status. According to the researchers, The findings show that school climate and meta-cognitive skill building are predictive of greater student achievement outcomes in Title I elementary schools, and socioeconomic status is not. The likelihood that teachers were at a high-performing (vs. low-performing) school was over two and a half times greater when cognitive skills were built and over four times greater where school climate was strongly positive. This study adds to our increasing understanding of potential pathways to realistically close achievement gaps for those from lower socioeconomic status.46

This study is a significant indication that school improvement strategies designed to improve student achievement, particularly in lowperforming schools, must include efforts to address school climate. Otherwise, the school and its students are less likely to increase academic outcomes and will instead continue to lag behind other students. Closing the student achievement gaps will require improving school climate. Another study with economically disadvantaged students that examined the relationship between school climate and academic achievement focused on third and fourth grade students in Reading and Mathematics.47 Students’ perception of school climate was studied using the Tripod Survey variables of teaching effectiveness, student engagement, student satisfaction, and whole-school climate. The academic achievement was based on results of the Tennessee Comprehensive Achievement Program (TCAP) in the subjects of Mathematics and Reading/Language Arts. The Tripod Survey comes from the Tripod Project at Harvard University.48 In addition to studying the relationship between school climate and academic achievement, the Tripod Project examined the relationship of a caring, captivating, and challenging school climate in predicting achievement of third and fourth grade students in the subjects of Mathematics and Read46

Ibid. Gina Smallwood, “The Impact of School Climate on the Achievement of Elementary School Students Who Are Economically Disadvantaged: A Quantitative Study” (dissertation, Tennessee State University, 2014), http://digitalscholarship.tnstate.edu/dissertations/AAI3623259. 48 R. F. Ferguson, The TRIPOD Project Framework (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 2008), http://www.staffordschools.org/cms/lib2/NJ01001734/Centricity/Domain/24/Stude nt%20Survey.pdf. 47

School Climate and Student Achievement

33

ing/Language Arts. The study found a significant relationship between school climate and academic achievement. According to the researcher, It was found that a caring school climate positively affected the achievement of third and fourth grade students who are economically disadvantaged in both Mathematics and Reading/Language Arts. In the presence of an academically challenging school climate, achievement of third and fourth grade students was impacted in a positive way.49

The relationship between school climate and academic achievement was also verified in a study of affluent schools in suburban school districts. Many of the research studies on the impact of school climate on academic achievement have centered on urban schools, with very few studies on schools in suburban areas. Sulak questioned whether the urban schools differ from suburban schools when measuring school climate and, consequently, if there may be a difference in academic achievement as the result of differences in school climate–is the effect of school climate on student achievement different depending on the socioeconomic status of the school?50 Sulak used a nationally representative sample of several suburban schools and reviewed national academic tests to ascertain the predictive value of school climate on academic achievement. The findings suggest that school climate impacts suburban school student achievement in much the same way that it affects the student achievement of students attending urban schools. Students attending a suburban school with a negative school climate were found to have lower levels of student achievement than students attending a suburban school with a positive school climate. Apparently it does not matter if a school is urban or suburban. What matters is that student achievement and school climate are related. A comprehensive study in Alaska that grew out of the Association of Alaska School Boards (AASB) survey of schools, addresses causality and direction.51 The AASB developed a survey to evaluate the Alaska Initiative for Community Engagement (ICE) in order to encourage adults in 49

Ibid. Tracey N. Sulak, “School Climate and Academic Achievement in Suburban Schools, Education and Urban Society,” [July 2, 2014 online publication]. doi:10.1177/0013124514541465. 51 David Osher, Elizabeth Spier, Kimberly Kendziora, and Cindy Cai, “Improving Academic Achievement through Improving School Climate and Student Connectedness,” Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Conference, San Diego, CA, 2009. 50

Chapter Two

34

communities to engage in creating positive changes in the climate of the community and in school climate to promote a healthy quality of life for young people, including improving academic achievement outcomes, as well as other health factors. One significant component of the longitudinal evaluation was the development of a school district survey for students and staff members that centered on the quality of the school environment– the school’s climate, including connectedness, or how and if students, teachers, and parents feel connected to the school in terms of relationships, participation, inclusion, and support. The survey categories included: caring adults; connectedness; peer climate; social and emotional learning; student involvement; and staff attitudes. The survey was implemented in 105 schools located in 38 school districts. The findings of the study showed that participating schools that worked to improve school climate increased the percentage of students achieving proficiency in all three Standards-Based Assessments (SBA): Reading, Mathematics, and Writing. More specifically, the study found that student ratings of school climate factors of caring adults and connectedness were each positively and significantly related to increases in SBA Reading and Writing scores. Another school climate factor, peer climate, was slightly less but significantly related to increases in SBA Reading scores, and positive rankings of the social emotional learning component of school climate was associated with SBA Writing scores. Increases in SBA Math scores were associated with positive ratings of caring adults, peer climate, and connectedness. Additionally, positive staff ratings for student involvement, social emotional learning, and staff attitudes were related to increases in SBA Math scores. According to the researchers, These results show that, not only are several aspects of school climate and connectedness related to student achievement, but positive changes in school climate and connectedness are related to significant gains in student scores on statewide achievement tests. These findings move beyond simply knowing that schools with good climate and connectedness are likely to have good student achievement, and that schools with poor climate and connectedness are likely to have poor student achievement. They show that whether a school starts with high or low school climate and connectedness, and high or low achievement scores, changing that school’s climate and connectedness for the better is associated with increases in student performance in reading, writing, and mathematics.52

52

Ibid.

School Climate and Student Achievement

35

These findings are critically important because they indicated that school climate and student achievement had a causal relationship– changing one changed the other. It is also encouraging that the study found improving school climate can lead to improved student achievement outcomes. In another study of the relationship between school climate and student achievement, the researchers added the element of student victimization.53 The study considered the relationship between peer victimization and academic achievement and the possible role of school climate as a mediating factor. For the academic achievement measure the study used Grade Point Average. The sample included 1,023 fifth grade students in 50 schools. The researchers reviewed associations between victimization, school climate, and Grade Point Average, with school climate used as the contextual variable. The results found that a correlation between peer victimization within the context of a negative school climate lowered Grade Point Average significantly. The researchers stated, Results of multilevel analyses revealed that peer victimization was negatively associated with Grade Point Average (GPA), and that lower schoollevel climate ratings were associated with lower GPA. The relation between peer victimization and GPA remained significant after taking into account (a) school-level climate scores, (b) individual variability in schoolclimate scores, and (c) several covariates–ethnicity, absenteeism, household income, parental education, percentage of minority students, type of school, and bullying perpetration. These findings underscore the importance of a positive school climate for academic success and viewing school climate as a fundamental collective school outcome. Results also speak to the importance of viewing peer victimization as being harmfully linked to students’ academic performance.54

The study found that school climate and student achievement are related, but the importance of this relationship is exposed in a different light when student victimization (or by extension other personal student issues) creates a situation where it is possible that the impact of school climate on student achievement is more pronounced. 53

Wiejun Wang, Tracy Vaillancourt, Heather L. Brittain, Patricia McDougall, Amanda Krygsman, David Smith, Charles E. Cunningham, J. D. Haltigan, and Shelley Hymel, “School Climate, Peer Victimization, and Academic Achievement: Results from a Multi-Informant Study,” School Psychology Quarterly, 29, no. 3 (2014): 360-377. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/spq0000084. 54 Ibid.

36

Chapter Two

The studies in this chapter emphasized the importance of school climate on student achievement across different types of schools, students, and communities. A negative school climate can impede the academic outcomes of students and it seems that the more vulnerable students are most affected by the conditions of a negative school climate. The good news is that a negative school climate can be changed into a positive school climate, resulting in increases and improvements in student achievement.

Chapter Two: School Climate and Student Achievement Summary Points The dimensions of a highly engaging and safe and supportive school climate are essential elements that allow students to maintain the interest and motivation level necessary to be successful in school. Schools that link school improvement with school climate show significantly greater improvement in student achievement and attendance when parents and teachers are involved in school improvement efforts. Antisocial behavior and academic failure are context specific: each occurs within a school climate in which conditions can be identified that reasonably predict problematic behavior and can be modified to reduce such behavior. The importance of attitude and expectations within a school’s climate is related to student achievement, but student achievement outcomes are also dependent on relationships where engaging students in the learning process becomes the expectation of the school. The interaction and relationships between and among students and teachers is an important component of what is required for students to excel in school, because they first must feel welcomed, safe, and secure, which is more likely to occur within a school climate built on relationships because from relationships trust can be developed. A positive school climate that reduces school disorder and consequently improves student attendance is a key to improving student achievement. It is important for schools to consider racial and ethnic relations as important elements of school climates. Positive perceptions of school racial climate are sometimes associated with higher student achievement and fewer discipline problems. Schools that need to develop school improvement plans because of underperformance on student achievement tests must include school

School Climate and Student Achievement









37

climate improvement strategies or they will not likely reach their goals and are even less likely to close the student achievement gaps across all minority student groups. Being encouraged to participate in class represents a high level of motivation for virtually all students and significantly reduces student misbehavior that stems from boredom and feeling insignificant and ignored or isolated. If the school climate is positive and focuses on task completion, academic goals, and positive relationships (particularly positive teacherstudent relationships), then it is much more likely that students will have positive self-awareness about personal academic performance goals and improve their academic outcomes. School climates that are “controlled” by authoritative administrators are less likely to meet the connectedness that students and teachers need in order to feel engaged at school. Using school climate as a measure is valuable in determining the performance of a school. The substantial relationship between school climate and student achievement suggests that better school climates lead to student achievement, and are not simply a byproduct. Treatment adherence to Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports procedures to improve school climate is significantly correlated with reductions in problem behavior. School climate impacts suburban school student achievement in much the same way that it affects the student achievement of students attending urban schools. Studies indicated that school climate and student achievement have a causal relationship–changing one can change the other. Certain student conditions such as victimization make the impact of a negative school climate on student achievement more pronounced.

CHAPTER THREE SCHOOL CLIMATE, SOCIAL EMOTIONAL LEARNING, AND MENTAL HEALTH

“School climate affects not only students’ motivation and school satisfaction, but their lifestyles, health, mental health, and quality of life, as well.” —Vieno, Santinello, Galbiati, and Mirandola1

During the last several years there has been a growing interest in and body of research on the impact school climate has on the psychological, social, and academic development of students. Some studies have found that the health of a school’s climate has a direct bearing on the mental health and well-being of students in the school. The conditions for social emotional development are linked to the quality of life in the school setting, based on research findings. There are some studies that indicate a negative school climate is related to social emotional health issues, such as depression, but there is also research to suggest that a negative school climate may exacerbate social emotional health issues and create conditions that lead to academic problems, behavioral issues, and/or attendance problems, which ultimately could be important factors in impaired social emotional development and academic failure. The role of early learning environments on social emotional development was discussed in the Adverse Childhood Experiences study, conducted by the Centers for Disease Controls.2 Addi1

Alessio Vieno, Massimo Santinello, Elena Galbiati, and Massimo Mirandola, “School Climate and Well-Being in Early Adolescence: A Comprehensive Model,” European Journal of School Psychology, 2, no. 1-2 (2004): 204-210, https://www.education.umd.edu/HDQM/labs/Alexander/ARL/Publications_files/M aggioni2004.pdf#page=219. 2 Vincent J. Felitti, Robert F. Anda, Dale Nordenberg, David F. Williamson, Alison M. Spitz, Valerie Edwards, Mary P. Koss, James S. Marks, “Relationship of Childhood Abuse and Household Dysfunction to Many of the Leading Causes of Death in Adults: The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study,” American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 14, no. 4 (1998): 245-258,

School Climate, Social Emotional Learning, and Mental Health

39

tionally, there are studies that consider the possible relationship between school climate and social emotional development and conditions for development. The self-esteem of children and adults has been deemed important since the first studies of the social emotional component, going back to the theoretical work of James and Cooley, and the self-efficacy theory of Bandura.3 In a study by Hoge, Smit, and Hanson, they explored whether or not school experience could predict changes in the self-concept of elementaryaged students.4 Included was how teachers evaluated students and interacted with students, as part of school climate communications and relationships. The impact of school experiences on students’ self-esteem was predicted using a longitudinal study of sixth- and seventh-grade students ranging in age from 10 to 13 years old. The researchers measured student self-esteem twice a year–once in the fall and once in the spring. Selfesteem was measured within three specific frameworks: global, academic and discipline. The study assessed the impact of grades, awards, and elements of school climate such as teacher evaluations of student work habits and social habits (interacting with other students and with teachers), participation in school events and activities during the year, and student ratings of teachers on self-esteem changes from fall to spring. According to the researchers, “In all tests school climate and evaluations by teachers had significant effects on self-esteem.”5 Students’ self-esteem was affected by school climate and teachers’ evaluation of perceived student self-esteem was linked to school climate. A 2001 study by Kuperminic, Leadbeater, and Blatt examined the interaction of psychological vulnerabilities and perceptions of school climate to possibly explain the emergence of behavioral and emotional problems during the middle school years, as evidenced by increases in behavior http://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(98)00017-8/fulltext?refuid=S02666138(11)00071-4&refissn=0266-6138. 3 William James, The Principles of Psychology (Dover Publications, 1892); Charles H. Cooley, Human Nature and the Social Order (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1902); Albert Bandura, “Self-Efficacy Mechanism in Human Agency,” American Psychologist, 37 (1982): 122-147, http://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Bandura/Bandura1982AP.pdf. 4 Dean R. Hoge, Edna K. Smit, and Sandra L. Hanson, “School Experiences Predicting Changes in Self-Esteem of Sixth and Seventh Grade Students,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, no. 1 (1990): 117-127, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.117. 5 Ibid.

40

Chapter Three

problems, school absences, disrespectful behavior, and drops in student achievement during the middle school years.6 The study sample included 230 female and 230 male sixth- and seventh-grade students (50% nonHispanic white; 27% Hispanic; 22% African-American; and 3% other) who were attending a large ethnically and socioeconomically diverse middle school. The study found that students’ positive perceptions of school climate moderated the negative effects of self-criticism on both internalizing and externalizing problems. According to the researchers, Youth with high levels of self-criticism did not show expected increases in internalizing and externalizing problems when they perceived a positive school climate. Results were consistent with the idea that careful attention needs to be given to the social emotional environment of middle schools, particularly for young adolescents.7

The study suggested that some of the social emotional turmoil that manifests during the middle school years could be mitigated by a positive school climate. Another study considered the dynamics of middle schools. A study of 2,108 middle school students examined the relationship of school climate with emotional problems, conduct disorders, and victimization.8 The study found that student perceptions of school climate, including the degree of authoritative actions of staff instead of relational actions, had an inverse effect on emotional and conduct problems and victimization. The lack of interactions, relationships, and perceived opportunities to connect at school created a school climate that seemed to make the social emotional volatility of middle school years worse. Students perceived authoritarian leadership as stifling school climate elements that are essential to social emotional development, such as relationships and interactions. A study conducted by Yale University also examined the importance of middle school climate for explaining variance in student behavior prob-

6

Gabriel P. Kuperminic, Bonnie J. Leadbeater, and Sidney J. Blatt, “School Social Climate and Individual Differences in Vulnerability to Psychopathology among Middle School Students,” Journal of School Psychology, 39, no. 2 (2001): 141159. doi:10.1016/S0022-4405(01)00059-0. 7 Ibid. 8 Alessio Vieno, Massimo Santinello, Elena Galbiati, and Massimo Mirandola, “School Climate and Well-Being in Early Adolescence: A Comprehensive Model,” European Journal of School Psychology, 2, no. 1-2 (2004): 204-210, https://www.education.umd.edu/HDQM/labs/Alexander/ARL/Publications_files/M aggioni2004.pdf#page=219.

School Climate, Social Emotional Learning, and Mental Health

41

lems and social emotional indicators such as emotional distress.9 The researchers included 499 sixth- and seventh-grade students (51% females; 26% Hispanic; 22% African-American; and 52% Caucasian or other racial-ethnic groups) in a large urban middle school. After controlling for demographic and psychological variables, male students’ perception of school climate explained the variance in measures of externalizing and internalizing problems, while with female students it explained the variance more strongly in externalizing problems. The researchers reported that, “The findings are consistent with research indicating that schools’ social environments affect a broad range of student emotional and behavioral outcomes.”10 Male students’ reactions to a negative school climate were internalized and manifest also with external reactions that included disruptive behavior, while female students were more likely to internalize the negative components of an unhealthy school climate. Interventions that improve school climate are essential to addressing social adjustment issues and possibly minimizing negative effects on the ability of students to cope and succeed in school. The importance of school climate on psychological and behavioral adjustment was illustrated in a study of student perceptions of school climate and its influence on their psychological health.11 The study included 1,451 early adolescents in the sixth, seventh, and eighth grades. The findings are a powerful statement of the impact of school climate, because the researchers found that all of the school climate dimensions (safety, relationships, connectedness, sense of belonging, etc.) declined over the three years of middle school and during that time indicators of psychological/emotional health declined, also. According to the researchers, “Declines in school climate were associated with declines in psychological and behavioral adjustment. The results of effects were bi-directional supporting the role of school climate in the psychological and behavioral health of early adolescents.”12 Also, the impact of school climate on the emotional and social development/health of students was found in a study that measured the importance of school

9

Gabriel Kuperminic, Bonnie J. Leadbeater, Christine Emmons, and Sidney J. Blatt, “Perceived School Climate and Difficulties in the Social Adjustment of Middle School Students,” Applied Developmental Science, 1 (1997): 76-88. doi:10.1207/s1532480xads0102_2. 10 Ibid. 11 Way, Reddy, and Rhodes, “Students’ Perceptions of School Climate,” 194-213. 12 Ibid.

42

Chapter Three

emotional climate on student psychopathology. 13 School conflict and negative social facilitation were shown to be related to increases in childhood psychopathology in schools with a negative school climate. Effects on academic focus were even stronger that those of conflict, in the sense of being independently related to more syndromes, based on the findings: School climate effects were examined for conditionality on student characteristics and for synergism. It was concluded that interventions to improve school climate may promote the emotional and behavioral well-being of children and adolescents, particularly ones with mental health issues.14

Similar findings were reported by Loukas and Robinson in a 2004 study of the role school climate plays in early adolescent emotional and social adjustment.15 The researchers found a two-way interaction between “effortful control” (the ability to regulate one’s response to external stimuli) and school climate variables. Adolescent males that were low in effortful control who perceived elements of school climate as positive (such as cohesion among students, low levels of friction among students, or high levels of satisfaction with classes) reported fewer depressive symptoms and episodes. Adolescent females that were low in effortful control had fewer discipline problems if the elements of school climate were positive, especially when “their perceptions of friction or competition among students were low.” Adolescents coping with their own emotional issues during a difficult developmental period benefit from a safe, secure, and supportive school climate where there is a minimal number of distractions, such as disruptive and aggressive behavior or frequent negative verbal interactions between and among students. In a research project of 1,042 students in 23 middle schools, school climate support for behavioral and psychological adjustment was studied to determine the mediating effect on social competence.16 The study used 13

Stephanie N. Kasen, Jim Johnson, and Patricia Cohen, “The Impact of Social Emotional Climate on Student Psychopathology,” Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 18, no. 2 (1990): 165-177, http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00910728#page-1. 14 Ibid. 15 Alexandra Loukas and Sheri Robinson, “Examining the Moderating Role of Perceived School Climate in Early Adolescent Adjustment,” Journal of Research on Adolescence, 14 (2004): 209-233. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2004.01402004.x. 16 Ming-Te Wang, “School Climate Support for Behavioral and Psychological Adjustment: Testing the Mediating Effect of Social Competence,” School Psychology Quarterly, 24, No. 4 (2009): 240-251. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0017999.

School Climate, Social Emotional Learning, and Mental Health

43

an ecological framework to examine the relationships among adolescents’ perceptions of school climate, social competence, and behavioral and psychological adjustment. According to the researchers, Results showed that school mastery goal structure, promotion of autonomy and discussion, and teacher emotional support were negatively related to the levels of adolescents’ deviant behaviors and depression, while performance goal structure was positively related to deviant behaviors and depression. Social competence was a mediator between perceived school climate variables and adolescent adjustment.17

Social competence and social confidence were proportional to the level of school climate, with indications that those elements were significantly related to perceptions of school climate. The social environment and the social confidence and interactions between and among students were components of a school climate study that included the relationship between the social environment of middle and secondary schools, the comparability of teacher and student ratings of school climate components and academic achievement on standardized tests. 18 According to the researchers, “In three large-scale samples of schools, teachers' climate ratings were associated significantly and consistently with students' performance on standardized tests of academic achievement, and with indexes of their academic, behavioral, social emotional adjustment.”19 There was a correlation between school climate and social emotional indicators, including social confidence and interactions. This correlation extended to reveal a significant impact on student achievement outcomes, also. The social emotional components were included in a study of classroom climate and the social emotional health of primary school children.20 The importance of this study was its focus on young students and possible long-term impact of classroom climate on components of social emotional health development, specifically to determine if students who had emotional and behavioral problems in the second grade were more vulnerable to the effects of a poor classroom climate four years later. The students (n 17

Ibid. Brand, Felner, Seitsinger, Burns, and Bolton, “A Large Scale Study,” 507-535. 19 Ibid. 20 Heidi Somersalo, Tytti Solantaus, and Fredrik Almqvist, “Classroom Climate and the Mental Health of Primary School Children,” Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 56, no. 4 (2002): 285-290. doi:10.1080/08039480260242787. 18

44

Chapter Three

= 861) in the study included second graders (average age of eight years) and when the same students were in the sixth grade (average age of 12 years). The Rutter Teacher Questionnaire (RB2) was used when the students were in the second grade and the Teacher Report Form (TRF) was used when the same students were in the sixth grade. The surveys were used to measure internalizing mechanisms, externalizing mechanisms, and total student problem scores. Classroom climate was measured using a composite variable at the time of the second survey, including elements associated with school climate such as relationships, engagement, participation, and interaction. According to the researchers, The results show associations between poor sixth-grade classroom climate and an increase in emotional and behavioral problems in both boys and girls. In addition, the girls who were overall poorly adjusted, particularly those who had externalizing problems in the second grade, were especially vulnerable to a poor classroom climate in the sixth grade.21

The study provides a strong indication that classroom climate, including the components that are also commonly associated with school climate (since classroom climate and school climate are related), can further destabilize children who already have social emotional issues and may even compromise external efforts to address the children’s mental health status. Also, it is important to note that the negative effects are not short-term or situational. The study found that over time the mental health status of the students worsened if the conditions of the classroom climate did not improve. The themes of school climate and student well-being were also considered in a 2004 study that matched school climate and the lifestyle health of early adolescent students.22 The research team used the theoretical work of Samdal, Wold, and Torsheim (2000) for the basis of the study.23 The theory postulates that there are variables that influence risk behavior–perceived 21

Ibid. Alessio Vieno, Massimo Santinello, Elena Galbiati, and Massimo Mirandola, “School Climate and Well-Being in Early Adolescence: A Comprehensive Model,” European Journal of School Psychology, 2, no. 1-2 (2004): 204-210, https://www.education.umd.edu/HDQM/labs/Alexander/ARL/Publications_files/M aggioni2004.pdf#page=219. 23 Oddrun Samdal, Bente Wold, and T. Torsheim, “The relationship between students’ perception of school and their reported health and quality of life,” in WHO (Ed.), Health and Health Behavior Among Young People, WHO Policies series, 1, online: www.who.dk/hbsc. doi:10.1076/sesi.10.3.296.3502. 22

School Climate, Social Emotional Learning, and Mental Health

45

physical health and mental health, as well as quality of life. The variables include teacher support, parental support, classmate support, and teacher/parent support. The variables impact student satisfaction with school, academic achievement, and school-related stress comparable to social emotional well-being. A questionnaire was completed by 1,347 early adolescent eighth-grade students (average age was 12.99 years) from 82 middle schools in northern Italy. The questionnaire was anonymous. According to the researchers, The results of the study essentially confirm Sandal et al.’s (2000) theoretical model. According to this model, during the early adolescent transitional period, school climate affects not only students’ motivation and school satisfaction, but their lifestyles, health, mental health and quality of life as well.24

The study found that teacher support and peer interaction are critical elements of a positive school climate, particularly in the relationship or lack of relationship between students and teachers. A school climate that includes positive teacher-student interaction, as well as opportunities for and encouragement of classmate teamwork leads to social emotional health. These elements together develop feelings in students of being listened to, understood, and engaged with others, which are important to social emotional development and student outcomes. The results also suggested that, Girls’ relationships with their schools involve aspects that differ from those of their male counterparts. In addition to being a crucial factor in school satisfaction and achievement, teacher support of girls can be a protective factor against school-related emotional stress.25

The implication from the study, as has been noted in previous studies cited, is that female students may be more vulnerable to certain conditions of school climate than male students in that they may feel more stress on social emotional factors due to the lack of critical school climate elements such as relationships with teachers and peers and the lack of connectedness or engagement in school.

24

Vieno, Santinello, Galbiati, and Mirandola, “School Climate and Well-Being in Early Adolescence,” 204-210. 25 Ibid.

46

Chapter Three

In an extensive review of the literature, Evans, Harvey, Buckley, and Yan validated the relationship between classroom climate and students’ social, motivational, and cognitive development.26 The authors suggested that there were three differentiable components related to school climate: (1) academic, referring to pedagogical and curricular elements of the learning environment; (2) management, referring to discipline styles for maintaining order; and (3) social emotional, the affective interactions within the classroom. The social emotional component and its relationship with and dependence on school climate are critical for teachers and administrators to understand as they work with students. In fact, the authors stated that the social emotional climate should be treated as an aspect of school climate, “…since it interfaces with the conventional academic and management elements of effective learning environments.”27 An earlier study found that school climate differences account for social emotional issues proportionately.28 In the study, 349 students in 15 secondary schools completed the Porteous Problem Checklist (PPC), an inventory of adolescent adjustment problems, and the Finlayson School Climate Questionnaire (FSCQ). Based on the FSCQ and the PPC, differences were found between school types on student mean scores on both questionnaires. There was evidence of a relationship between school climate as perceived by the students and the disclosure of social emotional problems by the students. Negative school climate ratings were associated with patterns of social emotional problems among the students. According to the researchers, “The conclusion is drawn that schools create an environment within which pupils then experience particular patterns of personal problems related to the characteristics of that environment.”29 School climate is directly related to conditions that can impact students’ ability and capability of dealing effectively with social emotional problems and their social emotional health. This does not appear to be limited to students with mental health issues; it applies to students who must cope with issues typical for the adolescent period of time. It is critically important to high26

Ian M. Evans, Shane T. Harvey, Laura Buckley, and Elizabeth Yan, “Differentiating Classroom Climate Concepts: Academic, Management, and Emotional Environments,” New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences, 4, no. 2 (2009): 131-146. doi:10.1080/1177083X.2009.9522449. 27 Ibid. 28 Murray A. Porteous and Eilleen Kelleher, “School Climate Differences and Problem Admission in Secondary Schools,” British Journal of Guidance and Counseling, 15 (1987): 72-81. doi:10.1080/03069888708251645. 29 Ibid.

School Climate, Social Emotional Learning, and Mental Health

47

light the finding that some students’ social emotional problems are linked to the characteristics of their climate at school, either as a means of mirroring the dysfunction of the school climate or in response to trying to cope with the climate of the school. The coping mechanisms are not always healthy or productive even for students coping with typical adolescent stress factors. A 2012 study found a relationship between perceived school climate and adolescent mental health. 30 The study explored the relationship between school climate perceptions and self-reported mental health among 415 high school students. An analysis indicated that students’ perceptions of six dimensions of school climate (sharing resources, order and discipline, parent involvement, school building appearance, student interpersonal relations, and teacher-student relations) accounted for a total of 15 percent to 22 percent of the variance as indicators of their mental health, which is a highly significant variance. This was above and beyond between-school differences in outcomes. According to the researchers, bivariate links emerged between positive perceptions of each school climate dimension and better mental health. The study found, “Worse perceptions of peer interpersonal relations, equal sharing of school resources and the physical appearance of one’s school building uniquely predicted greater psychopathology, whereas positive teacher-student relations were associated with wellness….” 31 As noted in previous studies, the researchers found that school climate has a more profound impact on girls than on boys, across all indicators, but the key findings were that (1) elements of a negative school climate are predictive of increased psychopathology and (2) the power of a positive relationship between students and teachers can mitigate the components of a negative school climate. The importance of school climate to the mental health of students was significant. The impact of school climate extends to the social emotional health of preschoolers and is linked to their social competency. In a study of 183 preschool children that looked at the impact of classroom climate characteristics, including the importance of teachers’ behavior and attitude towards the children, it was found that these characteristics were related to

30

Shannon M. Suldo, Melanie M. McMahan, Ashley M. Chappel, and Troy Loker, “Relationships between Perceived School Climate and Adolescent Mental Health across Genders,” School Mental Health, 4, Issue 2 (2012): 69-80, http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12310-012-9073-1#/page-1. 31 Ibid.

48

Chapter Three

the children’s social emotional health, as measured by their social emotional competency.32 The researchers found that, Results of multilevel modeling indicated that teachers' negative ratings of the children were predicted by negative teacher behaviors and less optimal classroom climate. Children with higher stress were more likely to demonstrate low social competence when in class with other children with less optimal social competencies. Teachers' positive ratings of the preschooler's social competence were predicted by positive assessments of classroom climate and teacher behaviors. Positive classroom climate appeared to mediate the relationship between teacher behaviors and preschoolers' social competence.33

School climate and classroom climate determinants were significantly dependent on the behavior of teachers, and this in turn had a measurable impact on the social emotional development of students. It appears that this impact was proportionate to the young age of the students and could have a longitudinal effect. Do changes in the school climate influence students’ social emotional, mental health, and physical health development? That was the focus of a 2003 study by Gadin.34 The researcher analyzed the effects of social emotional factors at school on pupils' health and self-worth ratings from a longitudinal perspective. The 3-year study included 533 students (261 girls, 272 boys) from 25 different classes in grades 3 and 6. Based on questionnaires, changes in students’ self-perceived social emotional health were compared with changes in school environmental factors. The researcher stated that, “A multiple regression analysis showed that a negative development of psychosocial factors at school, measured as control, demand, and classmate problems, was associated with poorer health [mental and physical] and negative self-worth among the pupils.”35 The study included a trichotomization of the social emotional variables at school, which re32

Holly E. Brophy-Herb, Robert E. Lee, M. Angela Nievar, and Gary Stollak, “Preschoolers’ Social Competence: Relations to Family Characteristics, Teacher Behaviors, and Classroom Climate,” Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 26, no. 2 (2007): 134-148. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2006.12.004. 33 Ibid. 34 Katja Gillander Gadin, “Do Changes in the Psychosocial School Environment Influence Pupils’ Health Development? Results from a Three-Year Follow-Up Study,” Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 31, no. 3 (2003): 169-177. doi:10.1080/14034940210134121. 35 Ibid.

School Climate, Social Emotional Learning, and Mental Health

49

vealed a possible causal relationship between social emotional factors and ill health and self-worth. The study concluded that the negative development in pupils' health and self-worth could be explained by the unfavorable social emotional environment that prevailed at school. In a study that examined Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries, it was found that school climate was related significantly to disadvantaged children’s resiliency, their ability to successfully handle negative school and personal circumstances and conditions by drawing on self-confidence, self-worth, and overall social emotional factors associated with positive mental health.36 According to the researchers, “The results reveal that not only do students' individual characteristics matter, but indeed a positive school climate is statistically associated with resiliency.”37 Students who are trying to cope with social emotional issues can develop some resiliency from a positive school climate, particularly with the power of positive interactive relationships with adults and other students. The resiliency factor also benefits students who are otherwise on track for healthy social emotional development, but who face a situational setback, such as the illness of a family member. The relationship between school climate and the social emotional health of students in a different culture was part of a study that considered the cultural specificity on perception towards educational environment and social emotional health. The study included Chinese and United States adolescents in grades 7 and 10.38 [Also see the review of a study comparing Chinese and United States students on school climate connectedness in Chapter Four.] The purpose was to consider cultural differences in social emotional factors and the possible effects of school climate on those differences. Based on theory, the researchers expected to find that,

36

The OECD is a unique forum where the governments of 34 democracies with market economies work with each other, as well as with more than 70 non-member economies to promote economic growth, prosperity, and sustainable development; Tommaso Agasisti and Sergio Longobardi, “Educational Institutions, Resources, and Students' Resiliency: An Empirical Study about OECD Countries,” Economic Bulletin, 34, no. 2 (2014): 1055-1067, http://www.accessecon.com/Pubs/EB/2014/Volume34/EB-14-V34-I2-P98.pdf. 37 Ibid. 38 Zhenzhou Bao, Dongping Li, Wei Zhang, Yanhui Wang, “School Climate and Delinquency among Chinese Adolescents: Analyses of Effortful Control as a Moderator and Deviant Peer Group Affiliation as a Mediator,” Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 43 (2015): 81-93. doi:10.1007/s10802-014-9903-8.

50

Chapter Three

1. Chinese adolescents have a more positive attitude toward school than American adolescents, since education is viewed as a way to happiness in Chinese culture; 2. Chinese adolescents will feel more favorably about parental involvement in school, since education is deeply valued in Chinese families; and 3. Chinese adolescents will report more positive social emotional health status in comparison with their peers in the United States, since education is expressly valued across all aspects of the culture. The study explored the behavioral patterns with respect to adolescents’ perceived school climate (school, teacher, and peer), perceived parental involvement, time spent watching TV and using computers, and the overall assessment of social emotional health. For the United States adolescent data, the data from the Health Behavior in School-aged Children (HBSC) of 3,159 seventh- and tenth-grade students were collected. The Chinese adolescent data included 497 seventh- and tenth-grade students. The results, based on the three hypotheses, found that Chinese students reported more positive perception in all items related to school climate except one (“My teachers are interested in me as a person.”) than did the United States students. However, the study found a trend common to Chinese and United States students. Chinese and United States students in the tenth grade were less positive about school climate than seventh grade students. The researchers state that this is most likely related school becoming more “demanding” and “monotone” as students reach the upper grades. The study did not support the hypotheses that Chinese adolescents would have a more positive perception of parental involvement than United States adolescents. United States students in both grades reported more positive perception regarding parent involvement than their Chinese peers in three out of the four survey items. Additionally, the study found that Chinese seventh grade students reported significantly more positive attitudes about social emotional health than United States seventh graders, because of higher evaluations of school climate. However, for tenth graders such differences were weakened in the area of general social emotional health happiness and completely reversed regarding feelings of loneliness or helplessness, and self-confidence. According to the study, cultural differences and nuances may have an impact on some aspects of social emotional health perceptions, but across both cultures these perceptions depended on whether the school climate was negative or positive. The study is an important contribution to the psychology of school climate because it shows that the importance of school climate on social emotional factors stretches across races, nationalities, cultures, and ethnic groups.

School Climate, Social Emotional Learning, and Mental Health

51

Attar-Schwartz found that a negative school climate had an impact on the social emotional interaction of students, with regard to peer sexual harassment victimization at school.39 The researcher studied the roles of student characteristics, cultural affiliation, and school factors by examining the links between students' reports of sexual harassment victimization by peers and a number of individual and school contextual factors. A nationally representative sample of 16,604 students in grades 7 through 11 in 327 schools across Israel completed school climate and social emotional questionnaires during class. Hierarchical Linear Modeling was used to examine possible links between and among the variables. The researcher found that approximately one in four students (25.6%) were victims of at least one act of harassment by peers (e.g., being touched or pinched in a sexual manner) sometime during the prior month in schools with a negative school climate. According to the findings, The most vulnerable groups were Israeli-Arab boys and students with negative perceptions of their school climate. The school correlates associated with higher levels of victimization were a higher share of students with less-educated parents, larger schools and classrooms, and negative school climate.40

The findings suggest that behaviors that negatively impact social emotional development such as peer harassment and sexual harassment are not sufficiently addressed unless an “ecological perspective” is taken to change those factors that are part of and are closely related to school climate. Hung, Luebbe, and Flaspohler also measured school climate to study the relationship between victimization, social emotional issues, and conduct problems in middle school.41 The researchers used a sample of 2,108 middle school students in grades 6 through 8 from schools randomly split into two analytic samples. In the results, authoritative structure, student order, and student support, all components of school climate, emerged in exploratory factor analyses. According to the researchers, “Student percep39

Shalhevet Attar-Schwartz, “Peer Sexual Harassment Victimization at School: The Roles of Student Characteristics, Cultural Affiliation, and School Factors,” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 79, no. 3 (2009): 407-420, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0016553. 40 Ibid. 41 Anna H. Hung, Aaron M. Luebbe, Paul D. and Flaspohler, “Measuring School Climate: Factor Analysis and Relations to Emotional Problems, Conduct Problems, and Victimization in Middle School Students,” School Mental Health, 7 (2015): 105-119.

52

Chapter Three

tions of classroom orderliness and the authoritative actions of teachers and school staff were each uniquely and inversely related to emotional and conduct problems as well as victimization.”42 This research highlights the association between relationships and social emotional issues with a school’s overall climate and the interaction between and among students and between students and staff members. The impact of student relationships, student engagement, and victimization as factors related to school climate and the subsequent effect on social emotional indicators and student decisions about school were the research foci addressed in a study by Hernandez. 43 The purpose of the study was to identify practices that promote positive social emotional culture in order to prevent and mitigate the effect of victimization, including student reactions to bullying. This qualitative case study utilized seven interviews with a school principal, assistant principal, counselor, and faculty and staff members. Also, there were structured observations of classrooms, the school, and the community, as well as artifacts and student data. According to the researchers, The findings from the study indicated three prevalent themes that provide a framework for promising practices that contribute towards an anti-bullying culture in schools: positive school climate; school organization and infrastructure; and student interactions. These emerging themes provide the systems and structures necessary within the school that are implemented and sustained to foster an anti-bullying culture. A positive school climate is fostered through leadership that involves collective team-building and the use of a whole-school approach. The school organization and infrastructure are strengthened by a focus on student safety and learning, an effective campus supervision protocol, and a system for the grouping of students/cohort model.44

Additionally, the study found that student interactions increased when there was focus on student relationships, character building, and social skills such as effective and positive social interactions. The influences of student interactions on interpersonal and value dimensions by school climate and peer victimization were the research dy-

42

Ibid. Emily Jo Hernandez, “Promising Practices for Preventing Bullying in K-12 Schools: Student Engagement” (dissertation, University of Southern California, 2014). 44 Ibid. 43

School Climate, Social Emotional Learning, and Mental Health

53

namics of a study by Leadbeater, Sukhawathanakul, Smith, and Bowern.45 The researchers examined longitudinal relations among children's and parents’ reports of peer victimization and their perceptions of school climate dimensions that reflect school interpersonal relationships in a social emotional context. The sample included students in the third and fourth grades (mean age was 9.32 years with 49% boys and 51% girls) for the purpose of investigating reports of peer victimization and school climate as possible bidirectional influences. This was done across grades and within a grade. The study found that, “Child and parent reports of school climate dimensions showed considerable stability where there were low incidents of victimization. Hypothesized reciprocal relationships between each of the school climate dimensions and peer victimization were significant.”46 The study also found that student views of the broader world, typically in a negative cognition, when matched with peer victimization, created challenges for feelings of school connectedness, safety, and seeking help from adults. The researchers suggested that building social emotional supports within a positive school climate may help mitigate the social emotional turbulence many students face and reduce the prevalence of victimization or its effects. School climate and the elements of social emotional development are relational. While there is no assurance that a positive school climate will create a positive social emotional state in students, there is research indicating that a positive school climate can benefit social emotional development, while a negative school climate may be detrimental to social emotional development and student outcomes.

Chapter Three: School Climate, Social Emotional Learning, and Mental Health Summary Points The conditions for social emotional development are to some extent linked to the quality of life in the school setting. Students’ self-esteem is affected by school climate and teachers’ evaluation of perceived student self-esteem is linked to school climate. 45

Bonnie Leadbeater, Paweena Sukhawathanakul, David Smith, and François Bowern, “Reciprocal Associations between Interpersonal and Values Dimensions of School Climate and Peer Victimization in Elementary School Children,” Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 44, no. 3 (2015): 480-493. doi:10.1080/15374416.2013.873985. 46 Ibid.

54

Chapter Three

Students’ positive perceptions of school climate moderate the negative effects of self-criticism on both internalizing mechanisms and externalizing mechanisms. Some of the social emotional turmoil that manifests during the middle school years can be mitigated by a positive school climate. The lack of interactions, relationships, and perceived opportunities to connect at school create a school climate that makes the social emotional volatility of middle school years worse. Students perceive authoritarian leadership as stifling school climate elements that are essential to social emotional development, such as relationships. Declines in school climate quality are associated with declines in psychological and behavioral adjustment with adolescent students. Interventions to improve school climate may promote the emotional and behavioral well-being of children and adolescents, particularly ones with social emotional and health issues. Adolescent girls that are low in effortful control have fewer discipline problems if the elements of school climate are positive. The social environment, the interactions between and among students, is a component of school climate. There is a correlation between school climate and social emotional indicators as they impact student achievement outcomes. School climate can further destabilize children who already have social emotional issues and may even compromise external efforts to address children’s mental health status, and the negative effects can be longterm. Teacher support is a critical element of a positive school climate that includes positive teacher-student interaction. Opportunities for and encouragement of classmate teamwork can develop feelings in students of being listened to, understood, and engaged with others. The social emotional climate should be treated as an aspect of school climate. Some students’ social emotional problems are linked to the characteristics of their environment at school, either as a means of mirroring the dysfunction of the school climate or in response to trying to cope with the environment of the school. The coping mechanisms are not always healthy or productive. The power of a positive relationship between students and teachers can mitigate other components of a negative school climate.

School Climate, Social Emotional Learning, and Mental Health

55

The impact of school climate extends to the social emotional health of preschoolers. School climate and classroom climate determinants are significantly dependent on the behavior of teachers, and this in turn has a measurable impact on the social emotional development of students. Students who are trying to cope with social emotional issues can develop some resiliency from a positive school climate, particularly with the power of positive interactive relationships with adults and other students. The importance of school climate on social emotional factors stretches across races, nationalities, and ethnic groups.

CHAPTER FOUR SCHOOL CLIMATE AND CONNECTEDNESS, ENGAGEMENT, AND RELATIONSHIPS

“By enhancing the quality of teacher-student relationships and interactions, schools encourage the development of a supportive school climate and promote the engagement of individual students with school life.” —Marsh, McGee, and Williams1

According to a 2004 study by Klem and Connell, 40 percent to 60 percent of all students in urban, suburban, and rural high schools are chronically disengaged and disconnected in school.2 What is meant by disengagement in school and what is connectedness? According to Blum and Libbey, “School connectedness refers to the belief by students that adults in the school care about their learning and about them as individuals.”3 School connectedness is a protective factor for students, with research showing that feelings of connectedness enhance the likelihood of positive student outcomes and a general sense of well-being. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Division of Adolescent and School Health (2014), the importance of connectedness at school should be explored further because of potential positive factors related to school climate and the possible negative impact on connectedness in negative school climates. The 1

Louise Marsh, Rob McGee, and Sheila Williams, “School Climate and Aggression among New Zealand High School Students,” New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 43, no. 1 (2014): 28-36. 2 Adena M. Klem and James P. Connell, “Relationships Matter: Linking Teacher Support to Student Engagement and Achievement,” Journal of School Health, 74, no. 7 (2004): 262–273, http://www.irre.org/sites/default/files/publication_pdfs/Klem_and_Connell_2004_J OSH_article.pdf. 3 Robert W. Blum and Heather P. Libbey, “School Connectedness–Strengthening Health and Education Outcomes for Teenagers, Executive Summary,” Journal of School Health, 74, no. 7 (2004): 231, http://leohchen.com/wordpress/wp-content/ uploads/2011/08/School-of-Health-Journal-School-Spirit.pdf.

School Climate and Connectedness, Engagement, and Relationships

57

CDC stated that students are more likely to engage in healthy behaviors and succeed academically when they feel connected to school–when adults and peers in the school care about their learning as well as about them as individuals. Research has demonstrated a strong relationship between school connectedness and educational outcomes, including school attendance, staying in school longer, higher course grades, and completing school. Connected students are more likely to be successful in school and consequently less likely to abuse drugs, dropout of school, and engage in other high risk activities. In almost every school climate model, one of the most salient components of school climate was connectedness. Schochet, Dadds, Ham, and Montague found that school connectedness is an underemphasized parameter in adolescent mental health.4 The study examined the relationship between school connectedness and mental health symptoms in adolescent-age students. The researchers used a sample of 2,022 students (999 boys and 1,023 girls) ages 12 to 14 years to measure school connectedness and mental health symptoms (general functioning, depression, and anxiety symptoms) at two points that were 12 months apart. According to the researchers, “School connectedness correlated extensively with concurrent mental health symptoms at both time points (between 38% and 55% covariation with depression, 26% to 46% with general functioning, and 9% and 16% for anxiety symptoms).” 5 It was also found that school connectedness predicted depressive symptoms one year later for both boys and girls. The lack of connectedness was linked to a higher prevalence of depression. The same level of predictiveness was found between connectedness and anxiety symptoms for girls and general functioning for boys, even after controlling for prior symptoms. Connectedness as an element of school climate is important for a sense of well-being in students, and this study found that school climate, connectedness, and mental health are inseparable. Another study looked at school connectedness as a mediator for school climate effects.6 The 2006 study by Loukas, Suzuki, and Horton examined whether four aspects of student-perceived connected school climate (cohe4

Ian M. Shochet, Mark R. Dadds, David Ham, and Roslyn Montague, “School Connectedness is an Underemphasized Parameter in Adolescent Mental Health,” Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 35, no. 2 (2006): 170-179, http://www.isbe.state.il.us/learningsupports/pdfs/school-connectedness.pdf. 5 Ibid. 6 Alexandra Loukas, Rie Suzuki, and Karissa Horton, “Examining School Connectedness as a Mediator of School Climate Effects,” Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16, no. 3 (2006): 491-502. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2006.00504.x.

58

Chapter Four

sion, friction, competition among students, and overall satisfaction with classes) were directly associated with subsequent early adolescent behavioral problems and depressive symptoms. The research included 489 10- to 14-year-old middle school students in the study. According to the researchers, “The results showed that school connectedness mediated the relations between perceived cohesion, perceived friction, and overall satisfaction with classes and subsequent student conduct problems one year later.”7 Risk factors and social and school connectedness were also included in a study that looked at early secondary school as predictors of late teenage substance use, mental health, and academic outcomes.8 This was a longitudinal study of secondary school students surveyed at school in the eighth grade (13–14 years old), tenth grade (16 years old), and one year postsecondary (17+ years old). There were 2,678 students that participated in the school surveys. Seventy-one percent of the participating students completed the postsecondary school survey. The findings concluded that, Having both good school climate and social connectedness in the 8th grade was associated with the best outcomes in later years. In contrast, participants with low school connectedness but good social connectedness were at elevated risk of anxiety/depressive symptoms, regular smoking, drinking, and using marijuana in later years.9

The findings suggested that healthy connectedness at school is more than just peer interactions; it must include connections with peers, teachers, school activities, and events at the school. The study also found that the likelihood of graduating from high school was significantly reduced for students with low school connectedness. The researchers added, Overall, young people’s experiences of early secondary school and their relationships with others may continue to affect their moods, their substance use in later years, and their likelihood of completing secondary school. Having both good school connectedness and good social connectedness is associated with the best outcomes.10 7

Loukas, Suzuki, and Horton, “Examining School Connectedness,” 491-502. Lyndal Bond, Helen Butler, Lyndal Thomas, John Carlin, Sara Glover, Glenn Bowes, and George Patton, “Social and School Connectedness in Early Secondary School as Predictors of Late Teenage Substance Use, Mental Health, and Academic Outcomes,” Journal of Adolescent Health, 40, no. 4 (2007): 357.e9-357.e18. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.10.013. 9 Ibid. 10 Ibid. 8

School Climate and Connectedness, Engagement, and Relationships

59

Students who felt connected at school had more opportunities for positive social connectedness, but the lack of connectedness at school actually compromised the positive features of social connectedness perhaps because the social connectedness was permeated with behaviors that were in response to a lack of school connectedness. It is important to remember that school connectedness is a significant component of a positive school climate, which creates the conditions that support connectedness. Connectedness was also an element of focus in a study that examined same-sex-attracted students’ perceptions of school climate toward their school-based environmental stresses and supports and how connectedness impacted those perceptions. 11 The researcher used Margaret Spencer’s Phenomenological Variant of Ecological Systems Theory Model, which provides a framework to examine strength and resiliency, especially during the process of identity formation in adolescents, to test the relationship between stressors, coping mechanisms, and academic identity formation.12 The findings suggested that, Students' connection to teachers and their school environment had the strongest total impact on their academic self-concept and motivation to learn. Of key importance was the indirect impact of students' perceptions of their school climate on both of these important academic outcomes, through their connection to both their school community and general school environment.13

The researcher pointed out the negative impact school-based risk factors can have on students’ perceptions of belonging, as well as the value of a positive school climate strong on connectedness. It is also significant that the findings showed a correlation between connectedness and increased academic outcomes. The correlation between connectedness and academic outcomes was the subject of a study in Alaska where the goal was to determine if engaging adults in the schools and communities would have a positive impact on school climate, students’ feelings of connectedness, and academic 11

Jacqueline Ullman, “At-Risk or School-Based Risk? Testing a Model of SchoolBased Stressors, Coping Responses, and Academic Self-Concept for Same-Sex Attracted Youth,” Journal of Youth Studies, 18, no. 4 (2015): 417-433. doi:10.1080/13676261.2014.963539. 12 Margaret Beale Spencer, Davido Dupree, and Tracey Hartmann, “A Phenomenological Variant of Ecological Systems Theory,” Development and Psychopathology, Volume 9, Issue 4 (1997): 817-833. 13 Ullman, “At-Risk or School-Based Risk?” 417-433.

60

Chapter Four

achievement.14 The Alaska Initiative for Community Engagement (Alaska ICE) was the center of the effort. Alaska ICE developed a survey for students and school staff members in 38 school districts in order to acquire information about how students and school staff members perceive school climate and connectedness. According to the researchers, “The results show that, not only are several aspects of school climate and connectedness related to student achievement, but positive change in school climate and connectedness is related to significant gains in student scores on statewide achievement tests.”15 The finding that school climate and connectedness can be improved and this improvement can have a significantly positive impact on student achievement is a powerful message to all educators and their efforts to develop comprehensive school improvement strategies. The importance of connectedness and belonging can prevent and mediate the effects of peer victimization among adolescents. Research has explored the role of peer victimization as an adjustment precursor and as an outcome, but what factors can mediate or prevent peer victimization? A study was designed to test for possible direct effects from peer victimization to adolescents’ academic outcomes, alcohol use, and school belonging or connectedness. 16 Adolescents from two samples were studied: 2,808 middle school students and 6,821 high school students. The adolescents in both the middle schools and high schools self-reported on peer victimization, school belonging (connectedness), Grade Point Average, and alcohol use. The findings indicated a direct relationship between peer victimization and Grade Point Average; an indirect relationship between school belonging and alcohol use; and both a direct and indirect relationship between peer victimization and alcohol use. The authors concluded that the, “Findings implicate school belonging as a mediator between peer victimization and important outcomes in adolescence.”17 In other words, school belonging or connectedness matters in adolescent adjustment. A school climate that creates conditions for connectedness can mitigate victimization.

14

Osher, Spier, Kendziora, and Cai, “Improving Academic Achievement,” 2009. Ibid. 16 Stephanie V. Wormington, Kristen G. Anderson, Ashley Schneider, Kristin L. Tomlinson, and Sandra A. Brown, “Peer Victimization and Adolescent Adjustment: Does School Belonging Matter?” Journal of School Violence, tandfonline.com, September 26, 2014. doi:10.1080/15388220.2104.992472. 17 Ibid. 15

School Climate and Connectedness, Engagement, and Relationships

61

The sense of belonging and connectedness to a school reduces the effects of victimization, according to a study of almost 400 students in grades 7 through 10 who completed three annual school climate surveys in successive years.18 The researchers found that, The steeper declines in aggression among victimized youth suggest a resilience process. High levels of family connectedness and school belonging were linked to a lower level of aggression regardless of victimization. Efforts to provide family support may be effective in reducing the risk for aggression among victimized youth. Promoting students’ sense of school belonging may compensate for the negative effects of victimization on aggression in the short term; however, broader efforts directed at establishing a safe and supportive school climate and setting social norms that discourage school violence may be necessary to reduce the incidence of victimization and subsequent aggressive behavior.19

A study in Ontario looked further into other significant factors of connectedness.20 Data for the study were collected from surveys administered to 2,243 seventh to twelfth grade students derived from the 2001 cycle of the Ontario Student Drug Use Survey. According to the study’s results, The odds of feeling disconnected from their schools were substantially greater for female students who perceived their health or academic performance to be poor, engaged in no vigorous physical activity, reported three or more physician visits during the past year, had low extracurricular involvement, and a negative school climate.21

Feelings of connectedness were related to higher levels of academic performance, less physical stress, and increased likelihood to engage in physical activity, such as extracurricular activities. Biag, in a descriptive longitudinal analysis of school connectedness with 15,000 students in urban schools, found that youth who reported feel18

Shaun D. Duggins, Gabriel P. Kuperminc, Christopher C. Henrich, Ciara Smalls-Glover, and Julia L. Perilla, “Aggression among Adolescent Victims of School Bullying: Protective Roles of Family and School Connectedness,” Psychology of Violence, June 15, 2015. doi:org/10.1037/a0039439. 19 Ibid. 20 Guy E. Faulkner, Edward M. Adlaf, Hyacinth M. Irving, Kenneth R. Allison, and John Dwyer, “School Disconnectedness: Identifying Adolescents at Risk in Ontario, Canada,” Journal of School Health, 79 (2009): 312-318. doi:10.1111/j.1746-1561.2009.00415.x. 21 Ibid.

62

Chapter Four

ing safe, connected, and secure at school demonstrated better than average educational and psychological functioning.22 Students who felt connected at school with school staff members and with other students experienced more confidence in social interactions and academic challenges than did students who felt disconnected. While Biag’s study centered on a large urban school district, another study focused on a small preschool in Atlanta with an emphasis on the impact of connectedness on foster children.23 The findings were similar; Shuler stated that, The findings of this study supports previous research about the role that connectedness plays in school climate and its positive effects on children’s attachment and identity formation. The findings reaffirm the urgent need for schools to examine school climate and create intentional pedagogies to foster children’s secure attachments and positive identity formation.24

Creating conditions with a positive climate that enhance opportunities for students to feel connected is important regardless of the size or demographics of the school. In the Dropout Prevention Guide, Dynarski, Clarke, Cobb, Finn, Rumberger, and Smink wrote about the importance of positive relationships and the connectedness between and among students and staff members toward high school completion was analyzed.25 Several studies have pointed to the importance of teachers in the development of positive teacher-student relationships as an essential component of a positive school climate and student academic success. LaRusso, Romer, and Sel-

22

Manuelito Biag, “A Descriptive Analysis of School Connectedness: The Views of School Personnel – Longitudinal Research with More than 15,000 Students Finds that Youth Who Report Feeling Safe at School Demonstrate Better than Average Educational and Psychological Functioning,” Urban Education, SAGE Journals online, June 24, 2014. doi:10.1177/0042085914539772. 23 Danelle Leigh Schuler, “Creating a Positive Learning Climate: A Case Study of a Small Day School” (dissertation, Emory University, 2014), http://pid.emory.edu/ark:/25593/g0knv. 24 Ibid. 25 Mark Dynarski, Linda Clarke, Brian Cobb, Jeremy Finn, Russell Rumberger, and Jay Smink, Dropout Prevention, Institute of Education Sciences Practice Guide, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, 20084025, 2008, http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/dp_pg_090308.pdf.

School Climate and Connectedness, Engagement, and Relationships

63

man provided a good example of the teacher’s role in connectedness.26 Using a nationally representative sample of 476 students ages 14 through 18, the researchers found that students who reported high teacher support of students–those who connected with their students–and who were respectful of student opinions, “Were more likely to see their schools as having respectful climates and healthy norms of drug use which was associated with lower levels of personal drug use. Students in such schools also reported greater social belonging and fewer symptoms of depression.”27 These findings indicated that the relationship and connectedness factors of school climate impact student achievement and may reduce the number of high school dropouts as well as mitigate other factors that impede students from graduating from high school, such as reducing the prevalence of selfdestructive behaviors and truancy. A study conducted by Ruus et al. included 3,838 students in the seventh, ninth, and twelfth grades from 65 schools and reviewed the results of student questionnaires that focused on elements of school climate, including teacher attitudes towards and interactions with students, defined as connectedness.28 The study found that school climate parameters, especially the school value system and the attitude of teachers toward students had an influence on “students’ optimistic acceptance of life, their psychological and physiological well-being, and ultimately their academic success.”29 The study supported the hypothesis that modifying a school’s climate by increasing connectedness and interactions can help the development of students’ coping strategies and consequently support student academic success. This study arose from efforts to prevent students from dropping out of school and/or repeating grades. The influence of teachers and connectedness within the context of school climate was the subject of a study that compared Chinese students 26

Maria LaRusso, Daniel Romer, and Robert L. Selman, “Teachers as Builders of Respectful School Climates: Implications for Adolescent Drug Use Norms and Depressive Symptoms in High School,” Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37 (2008): 386-398. doi:10.1007/s10964-007-9212-4. 27 Ibid. 28 Viive-Riina Ruus, Marika Veisson, Mare Leino, Loone Ots, Linda Pallas, EneSilvia Sarv, and Anneli Veisson, “Students’ Well-Being, Coping, Academic Success, and School Climate,” Social Behavior and Personality, 35, no. 7 (2007): 919936, http://donnieholland.wiki.westga.edu/file/view/student+well+being,+coping,+succ ess+%26+climate.pdf. 29 Ibid.

64

Chapter Four

with American students.30 [Also see the review of a study of Chinese and United States students on social emotional development and school climate in Chapter Three.] In this study Jai et al. explored students’ perceptions of three dimensions of school climate related to connectedness (teacher support, student-to-student support, and opportunities for autonomy in the classroom) and the associations between these dimensions and adolescent psychological and academic adjustment in China and the United States. The study included 706 middle school students with an average age of 12.26 years from Nanjing, China, and 709 middle school students from New York City with an average age of 12.20 years. According to the researchers, Findings revealed that students in China perceived higher levels of connectedness with teacher support, student–to-student support, and opportunities for autonomy in the classroom than students in the United States. Furthermore, students’ perceptions of teacher support and student–student support were positively associated with adolescents’ self-esteem and Grade Point Average.31

Chinese students perceived higher levels of elements of connectedness, namely teacher support and interactions, than did the United States students. This level of support may have influenced the student-to-student support, as students often model the behavior and attitudes of their teachers, especially toward other students. Openness toward students by teachers or their efforts to connect with students, or the lack thereof, was found to have at least some effect on students’ attitude toward schools, according to an organizational climate study of middle schools and quality of life. The study also considered the relationships between school climate and the quality of life in middle schools.32 The study used a sample of teachers and students from 49 middle schools that were randomly selected. Almost 50 percent of the teachers were administered the Organizational Climate Descriptive Questionnaire 30

Yueming Jia, Niobe Way, Guangming Ling, Hirokazu Yoshikawa, Xinyin Chen, Diane Hughes, Xiaoyan Ke, and Zuhong Lu, “The Influence of Student Perceptions of School Climate on Social Emotional and Academic Adjustment: A Comparison of Chinese and American Adolescents,” Child Development, 80, no. 5 (2009): 1514-1530. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01348.x. 31 Ibid. 32 Dennis J. Sabo, “Organizational Climate of Middle Schools and the Quality of Student Life,” Journal of Research and Development in Education, 28, no. 3 (1995): 150-160.

School Climate and Connectedness, Engagement, and Relationships

65

for middle schools. The selection of student participants came from a heterogeneous group of eighth graders who were administered the Quality of School Life Scale. The teacher-student connectedness based primarily on relationships and interactions was determined by the school climate support or devaluation of teacher-student relationships and interactions. A positive school climate resulted in higher levels of positive teacher-student relationships and interactions and higher perceptions of student connectedness, while the lower school climate ratings resulted in decreased levels of teacher-student interactions. A 2003 study by Hudley, Daoud, Planco, Wright-Castro, and Herschberg found that students’ perceptions of relationships with teachers were significant influences on student engagement, connectedness, achievement, and expectations.33 Engagement between teachers and students was the construct for the study, for the purpose of organizing strategies that support student adjustment, student achievement, and retention in school, especially with at-risk students. The study found that the importance of teacher and student engagement was critically important for students who are vulnerable, socially and/or academically, to feel connected. However, it was also noted that even high achieving students benefit from positive teacher and student engagement, “Even if high quality schooling is available, high levels of achievement will implicitly demand engagement [with teachers] on the part of students.”34 There are collateral issues, also. For example, the role of connectedness on student attendance is significant, and subsequently the impact student attendance has on student academic outcomes can also be significant. Student attendance and connectedness were studied to determine if there was a correlation, based on whether or not students feel connected at the school and engaged with teachers.35 The researchers looked at classroom social climate, student absences and grades, plus teacher perceptions of the social environment of classes and the school’s climate. The sample included 19 high school classes. The data review included student absenteeism rates and the average final course grades, compared to the results from the 33

Cynthia Hudley, Annette Daoud, Ted Planco, Rosina Wright-Castro, and Rachel Herschberg, “Student Engagement, School Climate, and Future Expectations in High School,” Paper presented at the Society for Research in Child Development Biennial Meeting, Tampa, Florida, 2003. 34 Ibid. 35 Rudolf H. Moos and Bernice S. Moos, “Classroom Social Climate and Student Absences and Grades,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, no. 2 (1978): 263269. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.70.2.263.

66

Chapter Four

Classroom Environment Scale that was administered to the students. The researchers noted the, “Results show that classes with high absenteeism rates were seen as high in competition and teacher control and low in teacher support and connectedness.”36 In classes where students received high grades, the school and classroom climates were viewed as teacher supportive and interactive, with a high number of students involved in classes and low levels of teacher control. Additionally, positive climate classrooms ratings were correlated with fewer student absences. Studies show support for Samdal, Wold, and Torsheim’s early adolescence theoretical model that links school climate effects during adolescent developmental stages to long-term effects such as motivation, health, and other factors.37 One of the determinants of school climate is the teacherstudent relationship and the level of connectedness that students experience. In a 2004 study of this model and the determinants, Vieno et al. examined the teacher-student relationship and school climate.38 According to the researchers, During the early adolescent transitional period, school climate affects not only students’ motivation and school satisfaction, but their lifestyles, health, and quality of life as well. Furthermore, although the role of teachers takes on different nuances for boys and girls, our results underscore the meaning and importance of this figure in the bio-psychosocial well-being of early adolescents. Therefore…teacher support is essential to creating a school climate characterized by interaction and teamwork aimed at fostering feelings in students of being listened to and understood.39

In an interesting study of the teacher-student relationship as related to school climate, Barile et al. studied the longitudinal associations between teacher evaluation and reward policies and student mathematics achievement as well as the dropout rate.40 The researchers used a national sample of 7,779 students from 431 public schools. Fifty percent of the students 36

Ibid. Samdal, Wold, and Torsheim, “The Relationship between Students’ Perception.” 38 Vieno, Santinello, Galbiati, and Mirandola, “School Climate and Well-Being in Early Adolescence,” 204-210. 39 Ibid. 40 John P. Barile, Dana K. Donohue, Elizabeth R. Anthony, Andrew M. Baker, Scott R. Weaver, Christopher C. Henrich, “Teacher-Student Relationship Climate and School Outcomes: Implications for Educational Policy Initiatives,” Journal of Youth and Adolescence, linkspringer.com March 2011. doi:10.1007/s10964-0119652-8. 37

School Climate and Connectedness, Engagement, and Relationships

67

were girls, and the average age of the students was 16 years. The researchers pointed to three important findings: (1) Teacher evaluations that allowed students to evaluate teachers were associated with more positive student reports of classroom climate. Apparently, when students are asked to give feedback, the act of asking makes students feel engaged in the classroom and they and the teachers are more likely to interact with one another. (2) Schools that assigned higher performing teachers with higher performing students had a negative association with student perceptions of school climate. It appears that higher performing teachers and higher performing students interact at higher levels of communication such that the elements of school climate have little influence, or are perceived by them as being superfluous. (3) Schools with positive perceptions of the teaching climate were associated with lower student dropout rates by the students’ senior year. This is arguably the most important finding–that over time the cumulative effect of a negative school climate can actually impact the student dropout rate in a negative way. With a rate of 7,000 students dropping out of school every day of the school year, according to the National Dropout Prevention Center, finding #3, that the cumulative effect of a negative school climate increases the likelihood of students dropping out of school, cannot be ignored, especially by schools with high dropout rates and low graduation rates. Much of the teacher-student connectedness centers on how effectively teachers establish a collaborative learning climate. Matsumra, Slater, and Crosson studied teacher efforts to create a respectful, collaborative learning climate and the subsequent influence on student behavior.41 The focus of the research was to study classroom climate, rigorous instruction and curriculum, and students’ interactions and connectedness in urban middle schools. The study also sought to investigate the relationship between rigorous instructional practices and teachers’ efforts to create opportunities for positive interactions between and among students, as well with other teachers. Observations (total of 64 observations) of full-period classes of 50 minutes each of English Language Arts and Mathematics lessons were 41

Lindsay Clare Matsumra, Sharon Cadman Slater, and Amy Crosson, “Classroom Climate, Rigorous Instruction and Curriculum, and Students' Interactions in Urban Middle Schools,” The Elementary School Journal, 108, no. 4 (2008): 293-312. doi:10.1086/528973.

68

Chapter Four

conducted with 608 students in 34 sixth- and seventh-grade classrooms in five high-poverty, urban, public middle schools. According to the researchers, Results indicated that the degree of respect that teachers showed students significantly predicted students' behavior toward one another and responsiveness to the teacher. The presence of explicit rules in the classroom and respectful, pro-social behavior also significantly predicted the number of students who participated in discussions.42

The teacher created the tone for school and classroom climate, and that influenced so strongly the attitude of students that it affected how the students interacted with one another. If teachers create a negative school climate, including few or no opportunities for interaction between the teacher and students, a shift in the attitude of students to the teacher evolves into a negative attitude toward other students, which increases the possibility of disruptive behavior. The interaction between and among teachers can also be affected by a negative school climate. In a 2007 study that included preschool children, the attitude of teachers toward students and student reaction to the absence of relationships and opportunities for engagement were studied by researchers to determine if negative ratings of students by teachers were correlated with negative student behaviors.43 The study also considered the role of family characteristics. The study centered on parents’ and teachers’ ratings of 183 preschool children’s social competence as well as measures of student behavior (referrals). The researchers reported that a “positive classroom climate appeared to mediate the relationship between teacher behaviors and preschoolers' social competence.”44 The importance of school climate and more specifically classroom climate is illustrated in this study with regard to children’s social competence at early ages, which is critically important for social adjustment and behavior in K-12 schools. The relationship of students and teachers was examined in a compelling study conducted in New Zealand that considered the importance of teacher-student relationships, school climate, and aggressive student be-

42

Ibid. Brophy-Herb, Lee, Nievar, and Stollak, “Preschoolers’ Social Competence,” 134-148. 44 Ibid. 43

School Climate and Connectedness, Engagement, and Relationships

69

havior. 45 The study sample included students 15 to 16 years old in the eleventh grade. The students completed an online survey that extracted how the students perceived the presence and impact of bullying and other aggression in high school. Twenty of the 27 high schools in the school districts participated in the study–10 rural school and 10 urban schools. Adolescent perceptions of school climate were assessed by the following items: “In our school, the students take part in making rules; Students are treated too severely/strictly in this school; The rules in this school are fair; Our school is a nice place to be; I feel I belong at this school; This school is clean; How often do you feel safe at school?” Item response options ranged from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree). According to the researchers, it was found that, Student perceptions of relationships with their teachers and peers and parental involvement with school were all significantly interrelated. The quality of teacher-student relationships was the strongest predictor of school climate, which in turn predicted both aggressive behavior and proaggressive attitudes. Teacher fairness, helpfulness, encouragement and interest in students were strongly associated with the perception of the school as being fair, not too strict, collaborative, safe, clean and a nice place to be, as well as engendering a sense of emotional attachment to school indicated by liking school, not skipping classes, and finding school interesting. By enhancing the quality of teacher-student relationships and interactions, schools encourage the development of a supportive school climate and promote the engagement of individual students with school life.46

This research supports the growing body of findings that the relationship between teachers and students is one of the most powerful and influential components of school climate and is based on engagement and the feelings of connectedness. Teacher control of the classroom and the relationship with the student as gauged by interactions as a component of school climate and the relationship with disruptive behavior were the focus of a study that used a 2month pilot model of a pre-post design to evaluate the effects of classwide interventions on school climate and disruptive behavior.47 The lack 45

Louise Marsh, Rob McGee, and Sheila Williams, “School Climate and Aggression among New Zealand High School Students,” New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 43, no. 1 (2014): 28-36. 46 Ibid. 47 Vesa Narhi, Tiina Kiiski, Satu Peitso, and Hannu Savolainen, “Reducing Disruptive Behaviors and Improving Learning Climates with Class-Wide Positive Behav-

70

Chapter Four

of classroom control can become a source of stress for the teacher and can disrupt the relationship between teachers and students, so in the study the researchers evaluated the effects of a class-wide intervention that improved the relationship of the teacher and students. The classes identified in the study were selected by teachers based on the instability of the “learning climate.” The interventions were determined by a review of data and surveys. The focus was on increasing the connectedness between teachers and students by improving communications and relationships. According to the researchers, The results indicated a large reduction in disruptive behavior in the time needed to maintain a positive learning climate and in strain experienced by teachers while teaching the classes. The intervention was highly accepted by teachers, principals and students. The results suggest that an easily applicable and trainable intervention [to improve climate], which requires very little external support, may produce significant improvements in learning climates in middle schools.48

Students need to feel connected at school to be socially and emotionally healthy and academically successful, and the study found that teachers can be effectively trained to improve school climate, thereby promoting more student and teacher engagement. This study illustrated that providing professional learning sessions on school climate, classroom management, and how to interact with students can have an effective impact on students. It also suggests that this type of training should be included in teacher preparation programs in colleges and universities. To a significant extent school climate determines whether or not teacher–student interactions are positive and if students feel connected in school, which together can drive student behaviors, student attendances, student attitudes, and student achievement outcomes. But there may be even more that should be considered. A study linked students’ attitudes about their future to the type of school climate they have been exposed to. The study aimed to examine the association between school climate and adolescents’ report of future orientation using data from 27,698 students in

ior Support in Middle Schools,” European Journal of Special Needs Education, 30, no. 2 (2014): 274-285. 48 Ibid.

School Climate and Connectedness, Engagement, and Relationships

71

58 high schools evenly split between male and female students.49 The researchers found that, Three-level hierarchical linear models indicated that perceptions of available school emotional and service supports, fair rules and consequences, and parent engagement were positively related to adolescents’ future orientation. Additionally, the school-level average future orientation was significantly related to individuals’ future orientation, indicating a potential influence of contextual effects on this construct. Taken together, these findings suggest that interventions targeting school climate may hold promise for promoting future orientation.50

If students experience a positive school climate and have the opportunities to connect and engage at school with teachers, students, and school activities they are much more likely to feel positive about their future prospects and potential. Additionally, students are much more likely to be engaged and focused on their present day school efforts and interactions both socially and academically if they look toward a positive future.

Chapter Four: School Climate and Connectedness, Engagement, and Relationships Summary Points 40-60 percent of all students in urban, suburban, and rural high schools are chronically disengaged and disconnected in school. School connectedness refers to the belief by students that adults in the school care about their learning and about them as individuals. School connectedness is a protective factor for students, with research showing that feelings of connectedness enhance the likelihood of positive student outcomes and a general sense of well-being. CDC states that students are more likely to engage in healthy behaviors and succeed academically when they feel connected at school. Research has demonstrated a strong relationship between school connectedness and educational outcomes, including school attendance, staying in school longer, higher course grades, and completing school. School climate, connectedness, and mental health are inseparable.

49

Sarah Lindstrom Johnson, Elise Pas, and Catherine P. Bradshaw, “Understanding the Association between School Climate and Future Orientation,” Journal of Youth and Adolescence, June 24, 2015 online. doi:10.1007/s10964-0150321-1. 50 Ibid.

72

Chapter Four

Having both good school and social connectedness in the eighth grade is associated with the best outcomes in later years. Students with low school connectedness but good social connectedness are at elevated risk of anxiety/depressive symptoms, regular smoking, drinking, and using marijuana in later years. The likelihood of graduating from high school is significantly reduced for students with either poor social connectedness or low school connectedness. School connectedness is a significant component of a positive school climate, which creates the conditions that support connectedness. Students' connection to teachers and their school environment have a strong total impact on their academic self-concept and motivation to learn. The importance of connectedness and belonging can prevent and mediate the effects of peer victimization among adolescents. Feelings of connectedness are related to higher levels of academic performance, less physical stress, and an increased likelihood to engage in physical activity, such as extracurricular activity. Students that feel connected at school with school staff members and with other students experience more confidence in social interactions and academic challenges than students who feel disconnected. Creating conditions with a positive climate that enhance opportunities for students to feel connected is important regardless of the size or demographics of the school. Students who report high teacher support of students–those who connected with their students–and who were respectful of student opinions are more likely to report their schools as having positive school climates. A school’s value system and the attitude of teachers toward students have an influence on students’ optimistic acceptance of life, their psychological and physiological well-being, and ultimately their academic success. Students often model the behavior and attitudes of their teachers, especially toward other students. A positive school climate results in higher levels of positive teacherstudent relationships and interactions, while the lower school climate ratings result in decreased levels of teacher-student interactions. The importance of teacher and student engagement is critically important for students who are vulnerable socially and/or academically.

School Climate and Connectedness, Engagement, and Relationships

73

Classes with high absenteeism rates are seen as high in competition and teacher control and low in teacher support of students. Positive climate classrooms ratings are correlated with fewer student absences. Teacher support is essential to creating a school climate characterized by interaction and teamwork aimed at fostering feelings in students of being listened to and understood. Over time the cumulative effect of a negative school climate can actually impact the student dropout rate in a negative way. The degree of respect that teachers show students significantly predicts students’ behavior toward one another. Students need to feel connected at school to be socially and emotionally healthy and academically successful, and the study found that teachers can be effectively trained to improve school climate, thereby promoting more student and teacher engagement. The quality of teacher-student relationships is a strong predictor of school climate, which in turn predicts both aggressive behavior and pro-aggressive attitudes. Interventions that target improving school climate may hold promise for promoting future orientation.

CHAPTER FIVE SCHOOL CLIMATE AND TEACHERS

“There is a discernible relationship between a school’s climate and the level of stress teachers feel at the school.” —G. Ahghar1

Many studies about teacher quality, such as a Harvard study of 2.5 million students over 20 years, have found that effective teachers are linked not only to better academic outcomes for students, but also to many other positive quality of life outcomes.2 The effectiveness of teachers is determined by a number of different factors. One important factor is workplace climate–school climate. Workplace climate research shows that the perception of employees about the work environment is important and insightful. It is characterized by the relationships between people and the organization and the effects of the conditions of the facility, leadership style, and communication effectiveness.3 Also, the quality of workplace climate is determined by the mutual influence of targets, formal structures, processes and the behavior of people. The feelings that an employee has at work, his perception of values, rules, patterns of behavior, ways of management, opportunities for creativity, and constructive feedback influence his behavior and conduct and also his attitude to the purpose and perfor-

1

Ghodsy Ahghar, “The Role of School Organizational Climate in Occupational Stress among Secondary School Teachers in Tehran,” International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 21, no. 4 (2009): 319-329. doi:10.2478/v10001-008-0018-8. 2 Raj Chetty, John N. Friedman, and Jonah E. Rockoff, “Measuring the Impacts of Teachers: Evaluating Bias in Teacher Value-Added Estimates,” American Economic Review, 104, no. 9 (2014): 2593-2632. doi:10.1257/aer.104.9.2593. 3 A. E. Reichers, and Benjamin Schneider, “Climate and Culture: An Evolution of Constructs,” In Benjamin Schneider (Ed.) Organizational Climate and Culture (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990).

School Climate and Teachers

75

mance of the workplace.4 Several studies found a very strong link between workplace climate and employee reactions such as stress levels, absenteeism, commitment and participation.5 For teachers and other school staff members, schools are the workplace and therefore school climate matters. Studies show that the quality of school climate is not only important to students and their social competency, social emotional development, academic outcomes and other quality of life factors, it is equally important to teacher effectiveness, teacher job satisfaction, and teacher retention. A study of teacher burnout by Grayson and Alvarez investigated components of school climate (including relationships, teaching and learning, and safety) and the possible relationship to teacher burnout. 6 Teacher burnout was defined by emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and feelings of low personal accomplishment. The study looked at 17 schools in Ohio and the teacher burnout rate compared to the school climate elements by weighing the relative factors of gender, age, years of experience, and teacher satisfaction with school climate ratings to determine the predictive relationship between school climate and teacher burnout. The results found that a negative school climate was related to teacher burnout. However, this inverse relationship appeared to be mitigated by teacher satisfaction, but only up to a certain degree. Teachers who felt they were effective teachers seemed more tolerant of and were less negatively affected by a 4

Samuel T. Hunter, Katrina E. Bedell, and Michael D. Mumford, “Climate for Creativity: A Quantitative Review,” Creativity Research Journal, 19, no. 1 (2007): 69-90. doi:10.1080/10400410709336883. 5 Dennis M. Rose and Jennifer M. Waterhouse, “Experiencing New Public Management: Employee Reaction to Flexible Work Practices and Performance Management,” Paper presented at the Industrial Relations European Conference, Utrecht, Netherlands, 2004, Rose_Waterhouse_IREC_2004_AV.pdf; Dennis M. Rose, M. Douglas, M. A. Griffin, and C. Linsley, “Making HR Work: Symposium–Managing the Relationship: Commitment and Work Effectiveness,” Paper presented at the Australian Human Resources Institute HR Practices Day, Brisbane, Australia, 2002; Dennis M. Rose and M. Griffin, “High Performance Work Systems, HR Practices and High Involvement: A Group Level Analysis,” Paper presented at the Academy of Management Conference, Denver, 2002; Alannah E. Rafferty and Dennis M. Rose, “An Examination of the Relationship Among Extent of Workplace Change, Employee Participation, and Workplace Distress,” in W. Noble (Ed.), Australian Journal of Psychology 2001 Supplement–combined abstracts of 2001 Australian Psychology Conferences, Volume 53 (2002): 85. 6 Jessica L. Grayson and Heather K Alvarez, “School Climate Factors Relating to Teacher Burnout: A Mediator Model,” Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, no. 5 (2008): 1349-1363. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2007.06.005.

76

Chapter Five

negative school climate, at least for a period of time. This means that a confident and competent teacher was eventually impacted by a negative school climate, but their resiliency level was strong. This seemed to be more relevant to teachers with considerable experience in the classroom than with less experienced teachers. The school climate factors of relationships and safety were significantly related to the teacher burnout factors of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization. The results strongly suggested that teacher retention can be enhanced by improving school climate, and while competent and confident teachers managed a negative school climate, even they eventually succumbed to its debilitating effects. Also, the effectiveness of teachers was compromised when they were suffering under the emotional weight of stress that was exacerbated by negative conditions in the schools. Teacher stress and school climate were also the focus of a study that compared the level of teacher stress and conditions of school climate in schools with different graduation rates.7 This South African study compared two schools that had graduation rates of 100 percent with two schools that had graduation rates of less than 25 percent. The schools were matched in area, size, resources, and equipment. There were 75 teachers in the study sample; 33 teachers from the two high-performing schools and 42 teachers from the low-performing schools. The low-performing schools had significantly lower school climate ratings than the high-performing schools. It is speculative, but the teacher stress level was at least in part a measure of expectations. That would explain some of the difference in the school climate ratings between the two types of schools, because behavior does not typically change without relationships changing, which does not happen unless the norms and values in the school change. Is it possible for teachers to feel competent in a failing school with a negative school climate? According to the researchers the level of expectations was tied to the school climate ratings, so the subculture of expectations may have affected the school climate ratings–where low expectations of teachers, students, and the parents became the norm. The research did not consider teacher efficacy, which would have added even more depth to the study and may have offered further explanation about the school climate ratings. The most relevant point is that a negative school climate can become the expectation and lower student performance and impact graduation rates. 7

Karen Milner and Hariett Khoza, “A Comparison of Teacher Stress and School Climate Across Schools with Different Matric Success Rates,” South African Journal of Education, 28 (2008): 155-173.

School Climate and Teachers

77

Teacher efficacy was at the center of a study that examined the impact of positive school climate on teachers’ sense of effectiveness.8 The study examined the relationship between two specified dimensions of teacher efficacy (general and personal teaching efficacy) and six components of a positive school climate (institutional integrity, principal influence, consideration, resource support, morale, and academic emphasis). The study’s sample included 179 teachers from 37 elementary schools in New Jersey. A survey that measures teacher efficacy and a simplified version of the OHI were administered to the teachers. The researchers stated, We found that a healthy school climate–one with a strong academic emphasis and a principal who has influence with superiors and is willing to use it on behalf of teachers, was conducive to the development of teachers’ beliefs that they can influence student learning.9

The researchers also said it is important to recognize that teachers’ confidence to reach students was supported by a positive school climate that helped them manage, support, and teach students. Ross, Romer, and Horner studied teacher burnout and efficacy in terms of a definition of teacher “well-being” in schools that implemented School-Wide PBIS.10 The researchers surveyed 184 teachers in 40 elementary schools and found a correlation between school climate elements (relationship, teaching and learning, safety, and institutional environment) and teacher burnout, teacher feelings of success and competency. When PBIS was implemented with fidelity, thus improving school climate, teachers experienced less burnout and significantly higher levels of efficacy. It is also interesting to note that the study found the most significant correlation between school climate, PBIS, and teacher well-being was in low socioeconomic schools. Another study considered the social aspects of teacher burnout with the aim to identify personal and social factors having the most impact on

8

Wayne K. Hoy and Anita E. Woolfolk, “Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy and the Organizational Health of Schools,” The Elementary School Journal, 93, no. 4 (1993): 355-372, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1002017. 9 Ibid. 10 Scott W. Ross, Natalie Romer, and Robert H. Horner, Teacher Well-Being and the Implementation of School-wide Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports,” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14, no. 2 (2011): 118-128. doi:10.1177/1098300711413820.

78

Chapter Five

teacher burnout.11 The study was conducted in the country of Georgia with a sample of 373 teachers, who were administered a survey that measured teacher burnout based on locus of control and social factors associated with school climate dimensions of relationships and interactions, which included leadership interaction with teachers and students, teacher interactions with leadership and students, and teacher interaction with other teachers. The researchers found that, The highest teacher burnout was identified on the Emotional Exhaustion sub-scale of burnout. Correlations were confirmed between burnout and locus of control, school climate variables and burnout, teacher burnout and number of students. The research findings are important as teacher burnout identification and its prevention are closely connected to teacher wellbeing and health, ultimately having an impact on teaching quality.12

The researcher’s study made the link between school climate, teacher burnout, and teacher effectiveness. The impact of school climate on teacher stress levels was also the focus of a study in Tehran, Iran.13 More precisely, the research referred to the school’s organizational climate and the relationship to occupational stress among secondary school teachers. The sample included 220 secondary school teachers, who completed a 27-item questionnaire on organizational climate that measured four levels of organizational climate: open, engaged, disengaged, and closed. The same teachers also completed the Vingerhoets Occupational Stress Survey, a 53item questionnaire that measures occupational stress. The study results revealed that: (a) 40.02% of secondary school teachers experienced occupational stress at a moderate or higher level; (b) the rate of occupational stress among teachers could be predicted using the scores on the school organizational climate survey; this predictability was highest for the open climate and gradually decreases through the engaged, and disengaged to the closed climate; (c) among the teachers working in the disengaged and closed climate, the rate of occupational stress significantly exceeded that recorded among the teachers working in the open climate.14 11

Maya Bitsadze and M. Japaridze, “Personal and Social Aspects of Teacher Burnout in Georgia,” Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 59, no. 59 (2014): 7-14, http://journals.indexcopernicus.com/abstract.php?icid=1100123. 12 Ibid. 13 Ahghar, “The Role of School Organizational Climate”, 319-329. 14 Ibid.

School Climate and Teachers

79

The study showed that there was a discernible relationship between a school’s climate and the level of stress teachers feel. When a school’s climate encouraged relationships through interactions and involvement, teachers felt less stressed, and when the school climate was closed and disengagement was the norm, the stress level of teachers was elevated, which negatively impacted their confidence and effectiveness. Studies have linked teacher stress and the conditions in a school that create or manage stress to teacher commitment and social emotional elements. A 2011 study by Collie, Shapka, and Perry studied the impact of school climate and social emotional elements on teacher commitment.15 The study sample included 664 teachers from 15 public schools in British Columbia and Ontario, Canada. The teachers completed an online questionnaire that included questions about teacher commitment, school climate, and social emotional elements. Data analysis of the results showed that, Positive school climates significantly predicted three forms of teacher commitment: greater general professional commitment, future professional commitment, and organizational commitment. Of the school climate variables, student relations and collaboration among staff predicted commitment. In addition, stronger beliefs and integration of social emotional elements predicted two types of teacher commitment: greater general professional commitment and organizational commitment.16

Of the social emotional elements and school climate variables the support, interaction, and promotion of a positive culture and school climate were predictive of teacher commitment. The level of teacher commitment was the subject of a study of 178 teachers in five schools that were rated as “excellent” based on student academic outcomes.17 The teachers completed two sets of questionnaires: the Organizational Climate Index (OCI) to measure school climate and the Organizational Commitment (OC) survey to measure teacher commit-

15

Rebecca J. Collie, Jennifer D. Shapka, and Nancy E. Perry, “Predicting Teacher Commitment: The Impact of School Climate and Social Emotional Learning,” Psychology in the Schools, 48, no. 10 (2011): 1034-1048. doi:10.1002/pits.20611. 16 Ibid. 17 Arumugam Raman, Chang Chi Ling, and Rozalind Khalid, “Relationship Between School Climate and Teachers’ Commitment in an Excellent School of Kubang Pasu District, Kedah, Malaysia,” Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6, no. 3 (2015): 163-173. doi:10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n3s1p163.

80

Chapter Five

ment. 18 The findings indicated that school climate and teacher commitment were strongly correlated. The more positive the school climate, the more the teacher was committed to his or her job responsibilities. The direction of the relationship was not determined. Whether the school climate increased the likelihood of teacher commitment or teacher commitment improved school climate could not be ascertained from the study, but it was clear that they were interdependent. The interplay of commitment, school climate, and efficacy was evident. Teacher efficacy was at the center of a study that examined new teachers and their experience with varying levels of school climate. Meristo and Eisenschmidt designed a study to look at first year (novice) teachers’ perceptions of school climate and how that related to self-efficacy.19 The researchers stated that, “The importance of self-efficacy and the school climate and their interrelationship according to teacher profiles were analyzed to better support the adaptation and professional development of novice teachers during the first year of teaching.”20 The sample size was 112 novice teachers who each completed a questionnaire that measured school climate and a questionnaire that measured self-efficacy. The sample of teachers included teachers working in kindergarten, elementary, comprehensive high school, and vocational high schools. The study found a correlation between teachers’ perceptions of school climate and the level of self-efficacy. If novice teachers felt that the school climate was positive and supportive, their ratings of self-efficacy were higher than when the school climate was viewed as less than positive. It’s interesting to note, also, that school climate was more likely to be positive in schools with fewer than 250 students than in larger schools, which resulted in a high level of self-efficacy among novice teachers in those schools. The possible relationship between self-efficacy and the effectiveness of teachers and school climate was also studied in a research project in

18

Wayne K. Hoy, Scott R. Sweetland, and Page A. Smith, “Toward an Organizational Model of Achievement in High Schools: The Significance of Collective Efficacy,” Educational Administration Quarterly, 38, no. 1 (2002): 77-93, doi:10.1177/0013161X02381004; Richard T. Mowday, Richard M. Steers, and Lyman W. Porter, “The Measurement of Organizational Commitment,” Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14 (1979): 224-247. doi:10.1016/0001-8791(79)90072-1. 19 Merilyn Meristo and Eve Eisenschmidt, “Novice Teachers’ Perceptions of School Climate and Self-Efficacy,” International Journal of Educational Research, 67(2014): 1-10. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2014.04.003. 20 Ibid.

School Climate and Teachers

81

Kalale, Iran with 43 teachers.21 The teachers were administered the Organizational Climate of School questionnaire and the Teachers Effectiveness questionnaire. The results of the study found a strong correlation between the effectiveness of teachers, ratings of self-efficacy and the level of school climate. If the school climate was perceived to be positive, the teachers’ self-efficacy and effectiveness ratings were higher than if the school climate rating was neutral or negative. In a different perspective of the correlation between school climate and teacher behavior, Ervasti et al. studied the possible correlation between students’ ratings of school climate as a predictor of teachers’ sickness absence in Finnish schools.22 Recalling the studies that found a very strong link between workplace climate and employee reactions such as stress levels and absenteeism, the study examined the impact of school climate on teacher attendance patterns. Based on the assumption that social relationships and workplace climate are as much a determinant of teacher attendance as is physical illness, the study examined whether there was a correlation between a student’s evaluation of school climate, including levels of interactions and relationships, among other components, and the predicted sickness absences among teachers. The sample included 17,033 students aged 14 through 16 from 90 schools who took the School Health Promotion Survey. For the analysis, the researchers linked student survey results with records of sickness absence of 2,364 teachers during a twoyear period of time. The Finnish database of teacher sickness absences included the reason for the absence. The findings strongly suggest a link between the school climate rating and social relationships within the school climate and teachers’ sickness absences, with the school climate being predictive of teacher sickness absences. What is most interesting about this study is the researcher’s decision to compare the students’ perception of school climate to teacher sickness absences instead of linking teachers’ perception of school climate to teacher sickness absences.

21

Nasser Bai, Mehdi Heydari, and Safura Niknahad, “The Relationship between School Organizational Climate and Physical Education Teachers’ Effectiveness,” Research Journal of Sport Sciences, 2, no. 1 (2014): 27-31, http://rjssjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/paper15.pdf. 22 Jenni Ervasti, Mika Kivimaki, Riikka Puusniekka, Pauliina Luopa, Jaana Pentti, Sakari Suominen, Kirsi Ahola, Jussi Vahtera, and Marianna Virtanen, “Students’ School Satisfaction as Predictor of Teachers’ Sickness Absence: A Prospective Cohort Study,” European Journal of Public Health, 22, no. 2 (2014): 422-427. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckr043.

82

Chapter Five

School climate affects teacher attendance, but how does teacher attendance affect students? The effect of teacher absenteeism on students was the purpose of a study by Sezgin, Kosar, Kilinc, and Ogdem.23 A total of ten primary school principals were included in the study. The results of the study found teacher absenteeism affected the following in this rank order: student academic success, student absenteeism, negative school climate, disruption of relations among colleagues, lack of cooperation, and disruption of discipline. Between the two studies on teacher absences and school climate, it can be shown that school climate impacts teacher attendance and teacher attendance impacts many aspects of school that affect student attendance, cooperation, and behavior. As with the many studies on the impact of workplace climate on employees including businesses, agencies, non-profits, and other institutions, we learn from studies of teachers that school climate is a major indicator of teacher job satisfaction, teacher effectiveness, teacher stress, and teacher confidence. Several studies have found a very strong link between workplace climate and employee reactions such as stress levels, absenteeism, commitment and participation. That link applies to teachers also. School improvement plans should include strategies to increase opportunities and conditions for teachers to be effective by designing frameworks for improving school climate.

Chapter Five: School Climate and Teachers Summary Points The effectiveness of teachers is determined by a number of different factors. One important factor is workplace climate–school climate. The quality of workplace climate is determined by the mutual influence of targets, formal structures, processes, and the behavior of people. There is a very strong link between workplace climate and employee reactions such as stress levels, absenteeism, commitment, and participation. The quality of school climate is not only important to students and their social competency, social emotional development, academic out23

Ferudun Sezgin, Serkan Kosar, Ali C. Kiline, and Zeki Ogdem, “Teacher Absenteeism in Turkish Primary Schools: A Qualitative Perspective from School Principals,” International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 6, no.3 (2014): 612625, http://www.iojes.net/userfiles/article/iojes_1473.pdf.

School Climate and Teachers











83

comes, and other quality of life factors, it is equally important to teachers. A negative school climate is related to teacher burnout. Teachers who feel they are effective teachers seem more tolerant of and are less negatively affected by a negative school climate, at least for a period of time. A confident and competent teacher may manage effectively for a while in a school with a negative climate, but will eventually be worn down by a negative school climate. The school climate factors of relationships and safety are significantly related to the teacher burnout factors of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization. Teacher retention can be enhanced by improving school climate. The effectiveness of teachers is compromised when they are suffering under the emotional weight of stress, particularly stress within a negative school climate. The level of expectations may be linked to school climate ratings, so the subculture of expectations may affect school climate ratings–a negative school climate may become the norm. A healthy school climate–one with a strong academic emphasis and a principal who has influence with superiors and is willing to use it on behalf of teachers–is conducive to the development of teachers’ beliefs that they can influence student learning. When PBIS is implemented with fidelity, thus improving school climate, teachers experienced less burnout and significantly higher levels of efficacy. Teacher burnout identification and its prevention are closely connected to teacher well-being and health, which ultimately have an impact on teaching quality. Positive school climate significantly predicts three forms of teacher commitment: greater general professional commitment, future professional commitment, and organizational commitment. The more positive the school climate, the more teachers are committed to their job responsibilities. The rate of occupational stress among teachers can be predicted based on school climate measures. Teacher satisfaction and efficacy are highest in open, positive school climates and gradually decrease as the school climate becomes less open and disengaged.

84

Chapter Five

When a school’s climate encourages relationships through interactions and involvement, teachers feel less stressed. If new teachers feel that school climate is positive and supportive, their ratings of self-efficacy are higher than when the school climate is viewed as less than positive. There is a link between the school climate rating and social relationships within the school climate and teachers’ sickness absences, with the school climate being predictive of teacher sickness absences. School climate impacts teacher attendance and teacher attendance impacts many aspects of school that affect student attendance, cooperation, and behavior.

CHAPTER SIX SCHOOL CLIMATE AND LEADERSHIP

“Principals can be the key to establishing a respectful school climate that can facilitate teaching and learning.” —S.A. Roderiguez1

A number of studies have explored the relationship between leadership and workplace culture and found that leaders are a key component to the health of workplace climate, through decision-making, relationship building, creating conditions for creativity and professional development, modeling collaborative behavior, and providing accurate and constructive feedback.2 The crucial role of leadership and workplace climate has been confirmed in international studies, as well.3 The importance of leadership to school climate is just as significant as leadership is in other work places. 1

S. Anne Roderiguez, “Outrageous Leadership: Three Exemplary Principals and the Climate They Create” (dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 2007), http://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI3255861. 2 Lory Block, “The Leadership-Culture Connection: An Exploratory Investigation,” Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 24, no. 5 (2003): 318– 334, http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437730310494293; Frank P. Mineo, “An Examination of the Relationship between Leadership Styles and Organizational Sector Culture for the Emergency Medical Services Leader” (doctoral thesis, Capella University, 2009); Emmanuel Ogbonna and Lloyd C. Harris, “Leadership Style, Organizational Culture and Performance: Empirical Evidence from UK Companies,” International Journal of Human Resource Management, 11, no. 4 (2000): 766-788. doi:10.1080/09585190050075114. 3 Darcie J. Bishop, “The Relationship Between Faculty Perceptions of Music Unit Administrators’ Leadership Behavior and Organizational Climate” (doctoral thesis, University of Mississippi, 2003); M. Cloete, “The Relationship between Leadership Styles and Organizational Climate” (master’s dissertation, University of South Africa, 2011); M. J. Sawati, S. Anwar, and M. I. Majoka, “Principals’ Leadership Styles and Their Impact on Schools’ Academic Performance at Secondary Level in Kyhber Pakhtoonkhwa, Pakistan,” Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3, no. 1 (2011): 1038-1048; Adel Tajasom and Zainal Ar-

86

Chapter Six

Research shows that school climate-conscious leadership in schools has a positive relationship with many elements that are crucial to teacher effectiveness, student behavior and social emotional development, student achievement and other areas.4 Research has also identified a number of essential traits and behaviors of effective principals that drive student achievement.5 There is little doubt that leadership guides change and determines in large measure the effectiveness of change, as well as the overall success of a school, because much of those elements that make a school successful are tied to the school’s climate and to a large extent school climate is determined by the leadership of the school. According to Purkey and Smith school leadership is critical to school climate and creating schools that are safe.6 They identified ten characteristics of leadership that are linked to a positive school climate: 1. Having clearly stated rules for students and staff 2. Working with teachers to increase job satisfaction 3. Creating an environment in which teachers and students feel safe and that encourages positive interaction and cohesiveness 4. Giving teachers and other staff the tools, resources, and support of central administration 5. Giving students opportunities to experience the school as an interactive social system with chances for meaningful participation by students 6. Managing class size to increase and encourage interaction and relationships between and among students and teachers 7. Maintaining constant awareness and response to elements that negatively or positively impact staff morale in order to keep staff morale high iffin Ahmad, “Principals’ Leadership Style and School Climate: Teachers’ Perspective,” The International Journal of Leadership in Public Services, 7, no. 4 (2011): 314–327, http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17479881111194198. 4 Tim Waters, Robert J. Marzano, and Brian McNulty, Balanced Leadership: What 30 Years of Research Tells Us about the Effect of Leadership on Student Achievement (Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning, 2003), http://www.ctc.ca.gov/educator-prep/ASC/5031RR_BalancedLeadership.pdf. 5 Kathleen Cotton, Principals and Student Achievement: What the Research Says (Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2003). 6 Stewart C. Purkey and Marshall S. Smith, “Effective Schools: A Review,” The Elementary School Journal, 83, no. 4 (1983): 426-452, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1001168.

School Climate and Leadership

87

8. Encouraging strong school spirit in multiple ways 9. Helping students see and understand the relevancy and value of subject matter 10. Placing emphasis on the academic success of students as a group and as individuals; leadership is also a key component of school climate. Decisions made by leadership impact schools, teachers, and students in a number of ways that extend beyond student test scores. A study in Hong Kong researched the effect of a leadership decision to decentralize school and the subsequent school climate issues stemming from that decision.7 Hong Kong school leadership instituted a policy of decentralization aimed at devolving authority to all stakeholders at the schools. The study examined the relative contribution of two dimensions of school decentralization (teacher participation and school autonomy) to students’ math performance and it examined the role of school climate as a mediating variable between decentralization and student academic performance. The researchers used data from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA).8 The study found that, Teacher participation is more important than school autonomy for student math performance. Also, the effect of teacher participation on student performance is mediated by school climate factors – sense of belonging, disciplinary climate, students’ morale and student behavior that are influenced by school leadership.9

The study found that leadership decisions such as decentralization and shifting some leadership decisions to teachers had a positive impact on student performance. If school climate is allowed to become insensitive, uninspired, and unsafe, then leadership decisions such as decentralization and teachers-as-leaders aimed at school improvement can be compromised. While this study looked at the impact of school climate and leadership primarily on mathematics, another study contemplated the impact of 7

Esther Sui Chu Ho, “Effect of School Decentralization and School Climate on Student Mathematics Performance: The Case of Hong Kong,” Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 4, no.1 (2005): 47-64. doi:10.1007/s10671-0051546-7. 8 PISA is an international assessment measuring 15 year-olds’ literacy performance across 40+ countries and regions around the world. 9 Ho, “Effect of School Decentralization,” 47-64.

88

Chapter Six

leadership and school climate on reading achievement. 10 The results showed that, A principal can have a direct effect on school effectiveness through actions that shape the school's learning climate. The study confirmed the appropriateness of viewing the principal's role in school effectiveness through a conceptual framework that places the principal's leadership behavior in the context of the school organization and its environment and that assesses leadership effects on student achievement through mediating variables.11

In a study of schools that received Title I funding, Real Ciudad found that a strong relationship exists between the effective and ineffective communications and collaboration efforts of the principal and the perceived school climate of the teachers.12 According to the researcher, “The findings suggest that collaboration and communication are the main factors that drive the improvement of school climate.” These factors are related to engagement, connectedness, and relationships–three of the most important components of school climate. Leadership is more than a concept. It can determine if a school’s climate is open and inviting to students, teachers, and parents. A study reported in 1983 by Hoy and Henderson reviewed authenticity, school climate, and pupil-control orientation.13 Almost 600 teachers in 42 elementary schools completed a leader authenticity scale, which included subtests of the Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire. The teachers also completed pupil control ideology forms. The researchers found that, Leader authenticity of principals was significantly related to openness in organizational climate and to humanism in pupil-control orientation of the school, and openness in climate was significantly related to humanism in pupil-control orientation. Results support the assumption of the pivotal importance of leader authenticity in the development of the organizational climate of elementary schools. Findings indicated that authentic leadership 10

Philip Hallinger, Leonard Bickman, and Ken Davis, “School Context, Principal Leadership, and Student Reading Achievement,” The Elementary School Journal, 96, no. 5 (1996): 527-549, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1001848. 11 Ibid. 12 Real L. Ciudad, “Principals and Their Impact on School Climate” (dissertation, California State University at San Marcos, 2015). 13 Wayne K. Hoy and James E. Henderson, “Principal Authenticity, School Climate, and Pupil-Control Orientation,” Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 29, no. 2 (1983): 123-130.

School Climate and Leadership

89

behavior is when the principal accepts responsibility and does not abuse formal authority, fosters cooperation, shows self-discipline, and uses democratic relations.14

The leadership role of a school was found by Hanna to be distinguished between leadership perception and implementation (or daily operations).15 The daily operation of a school is the true measure of a school’s climate and level of influence by the school leader. How the school is run or the operations of the school on a daily basis is more predictive of teachers’ perception of school climate than the opinion or theories of leadership of principals. In other words, a school’s leader may perceive that the school climate is positive, but the proof is in the elements of school climate that students and teachers experience. For example, a leadership decision that develops and supports programs, activities, or practices that encourage teachers and students to interact more often is directly related to school climate. Other leadership decisions can be crucial to school climate if they have a bearing on school safety and security, the physical condition of the school, teacher-student relations, parent and school-community relations, student connectedness, and engagement in the school and school management. School principals can make a significant difference in school climate and are an essential element in perceptions of school climate, student discipline and attitudes, teacher self-esteem and sense of efficacy, respect between and among students and teachers, as well as a climate that embraces all students, including minority students and special needs students.16 A study that aimed to examine the relationship between school climate, teachers’ sense of efficacy, and teacher attitudes toward the inclusion of students with special needs in typical classrooms made a statement on leadership.17 In the study school climate included six factors: supportive leadership, teachers’ autonomy, prestige of the teaching profession, reno14

Ibid. James W. Hanna, “School Climate: Changing Fear to Fun,” Contemporary Education, 69, no. 2 (1998): 83-85. 16 James Sweeney, “School Climate: The Key to Excellence,” National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 76, no. 547 (1992): 69-73. doi:10.1177/019263659207654708. 17 Amatzia Weisel and Orit Dror, “Climate, Sense of Efficacy, and Israeli Teachers’ Attitudes toward Inclusion of Students with Special Needs,” Education, Citizenship, and Social Justice, 1, no. 2 (2006): 157-174. doi:10.1177/1746197906064677. 15

90

Chapter Six

vations, teachers’ collaboration, and workload. The study sample included 139 teachers from 17 elementary schools in the Northern District of Israel. According to the researchers, The results of Pearson correlation and multiple regression analyses indicated that school climate and teachers’ sense of efficacy as well as participation in special education training were positively associated with teachers’ attitudes toward inclusion. Self-efficacy was the single most important factor affecting attitudes. Examination of the inter-correlations among these factors and with attitudes revealed that those teachers who perceived their school as having supportive leadership that encouraged renovations and collaboration, but did not threaten teachers’ autonomy, tended to express more positive attitudes towards inclusion, which led to more receptive attitudes about inclusion.18

It is important to highlight the impact of the leadership’s role in creating a positive school climate that affects the attitude of teachers toward all students, such as special education students, and embracing a school climate that provides a positive experience for all students. Leadership style is an important school climate determinant. The manner in which a school leader manages a school and interacts with everyone in the school, as well as external stakeholders, is an integral part of school climate. Leadership style and its correlation with school climate was the focus of a study by Patrick.19 Findings showed a statistically significant correlation between respondents' leadership survey scores on school climate and those of principals’ administrative style, respondents’ teaching experience, and respondents’ job position. According to the researcher, “The data show an overall correlation between administrative style and school climate.” 20 Characteristics of leaders that promoted a positive school climate included the willingness to listen to teachers and engage them in decision-making. The importance of leadership style was important regardless of the respondent’s teaching experience. Research by Fordham University looked at the interaction of leadership and climate in four suburban schools by studying the leadership behaviors of elementary school principals and the effect these behaviors had

18

Ibid. J. E. Patrick, “Correlation between Administrative Style and School Climate,” EDRS, Accession Number ED387853, 1995, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED387853.pdf 20 Ibid. 19

School Climate and Leadership

91

on establishing school climate.21 In preparation for the study, ten suburban elementary schools were given the Organizational Climate Questionnaire (OCQ) for Elementary Schools-Revised in order to identify schools that had an Open Climate or a Closed Climate. An Open Climate was described as a school with positive relationships, interactions, student and staff support, effective teaching, and safe environment. Based on the results of the OCQ, four schools were selected for the study: one large school with a Closed Climate, one large and one small school with an Open Climate, and one small school that bordered on having a Closed Climate. Size was defined by the current enrollment of the school. A school with an enrollment of under 300 was considered small and a school with an enrollment over 350 was considered large. In addition to structured field observations and a review of school documents, principals of each school were interviewed three times. The results demonstrated that the strength of communications and relationship building in an administrator’s leadership style and administrative priorities were the determining factors for the effectiveness of school climate. In addition, the security and strength of leadership impacted on the collegiality and engagement of the faculty. The effect of leadership on self-esteem and academic achievement was important, but not at the level as other elements, except in the school that displayed a principal who was strong, secure, and fostered open leadership behaviors that resulted in positive opportunities for relationships and interactions. Leadership style applied to teacher behavior and efficacy, as well, based on the attitude and behavior of the principal and the corresponding influence on school climate. Teachers’ efficacy can be linked to the role of leadership in school climate, particularly with general and personal teaching efficacy. Hoy and Woolfolk studied these two dimensions of teacher efficacy as aspects of a positive school climate and the impact of principal influence, principal resource support, the principal’s impact on morale, and whether the principal’s leadership emphasized academics. 22 After reviewing the efficacy scale and Organizational Health Inventory results of almost 200 teachers in over three dozen schools, it was found that a school climate focused on academics was dependent on the leadership behavior of the principal. If the principal supported students and teachers, provided adequate re21

Christine J. Villani, “The Interaction of Leadership and Climate in Four Suburban Schools: Limits and Possibilities,” (dissertation, Fordham University, 1996), http://fordham.bepress.com/dissertations/AAI9729612. 22 Hoy and Woolfolk, “Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy,” 356-372.

92

Chapter Six

sources, and used influence on behalf of the teachers and students, the school climate was more likely to be positive and from that school climate there was a positive influence on student learning. The researchers pointed out that perhaps the most significant finding was in the relationship between leadership, school climate, teacher efficacy, and teacher confidence. Glover found that teachers’ evaluation of the effectiveness of principals was linked to the principal’s ability to create a positive school culture. 23 In a study of 68 teachers who completed surveys that measured school climate and perceptions of principal effectiveness, the researchers “found a significant connection between teachers’ perception of principal leadership effectiveness and school culture.”24 A close look at the behavior of leaders in schools and the impact they have on school climate and student outcomes was examined in a different way by a researcher who studied three exemplary schools. 25 The study examined the methods and practices of principals in three Catholic elementary schools and how each created a positive school climate in schools with low socioeconomic students in impoverished neighborhoods. The three schools were selected from five schools, based on the results of school climate surveys administered to faculty and students that revealed positive school climates. The researcher used a within-case and cross-case analysis of qualitative data, which yielded firsthand descriptive information to confirm what the principals did to create and maintain a positive school climate. According to the researcher, “Themes of personal regard, a caring-competency dynamic, belief in students, and a safety framework that fosters social trust emerged as central to their leadership practices.”26 It was clear that the principals paid close attention to the school climate and diligently addressed any threats to the school climate in a swift and targeted manner. They were each very protective of the school climate, with an understanding of the critical importance of a positive school climate to both faculty and students. The researcher called this attention to detail “intentional and responsive leadership,” and stated that, “This study

23

Veronica Glover, “A Study of the Influence of Leadership Competencies on a School Culture Organization” (dissertation, Pepperdine University, 2015), http://pepperdine.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15093coll2/id/543. 24 Ibid. 25 S. Anne Roderiguez, “Outrageous Leadership: Three Exemplary Principals and the Climate They Create” (dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 2007), http://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI3255861. 26 Ibid.

School Climate and Leadership

93

shows how principals can be the key to establishing a respectful school climate that can facilitate teaching and learning.”27 Attention to detail by a school leader includes how students transition from school to school, with the understanding of and sensitivity to the difficulty that students experience transferring from elementary school to middle school or middle school to high school. School leaders that focus on the importance of a positive school climate should also understand the value of including transition components in school climate development. Students who make the difficult transition from elementary school to middle school are more likely to be successful in a middle school climate of openness and authentic support from the middle school leadership. In a study of students transitioning to high school it was found that if school leaders provide school climate that includes social support opportunities, students are more likely to make a successful transition.28 A troubling but poignant ethnological study of the relationship between school climate, student academic success, and leadership was conducted by Tubbs and Garner.29 The researchers focused on a rural school in Northwest Georgia (50 miles north of Atlanta, Georgia) that had a long history of poor student achievement and progress, as measured by Annual Yearly Progress data (No Child Left Behind assessment metrics). The study included an in-depth study of the school’s climate, including the relationships between and among teachers, students, and the leadership of the school. After embedding themselves in the school, the researchers found a school climate where there was a lack of respect between the faculty and staff and school leadership, which created a hostile work environment and resulting low morale and disruptive student behavior. The researchers found, Deep frustration and anger on the part of faculty and staff were apparent in a substantial number of written responses to open-ended questions. Although responses to work environment and administration were split along 27

Ibid. Robert D. Felner, Melanie Ginter, and Judith Primavera, “Primary Prevention during School Transitions: Social Support and Environment Structure,” American Journal of Community Psychology, 10, no. 3 (1982): 277-290, http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-4419-8646-7_9#page-1. 29 J. Eric Tubbs and Mary Garner, “The Impact of School Climate on School Outcomes,” Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 5, no. 9 (2008): 17-26, http://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1615&context=f acpubs. 28

94

Chapter Six mean scores, the overall data indicated that the status quo cannot continue without continued negative consequences.30

The findings noted a correlation between the school climate and the effectiveness of the teachers and leader. The continuing academic failures of the school were predictable and will remain so until the leadership makes improving the school climate a priority so that engagement, connectedness, support, effective communications, and positive relationships are part of the school. One of the major components of leadership that affects school climate is relationships; how effectively people in a school communicate and relate to each other, teacher to student, teacher to teacher, teacher to principals, and principals to students and teacher. It is the principal that sets the tone for positive (or negative) relationships. A 2010 study in the Netherlands looked at the importance of the principal’s role as a transformational leader, how the principal’s position was a social network position, and how the principal created a school climate that was positive and innovative.31 The study sample included 702 teachers and 51 principals from 51 elementary schools in a large educational system. Using social network analysis and multilevel analysis, the authors analyzed a quantitative questionnaire with social network questions on work-related and personal advice. A Likert-type scale was used for measuring transformational leadership (the leader is charged with identifying needed changes, creates a vision to guide the change through inspiration, and facilitates the change in tandem with committed members of the group) and innovative climate. The researchers found that transformational leadership was positively associated with the schools’ positive and innovative climate. An interesting component of the positive school climate was the social and communication networking of the principal. The more faculty and staff sought and were encouraged by the principal to seek the principal’s opinion and advice about professional and personal issues, the more positive the school climate was rated. The principal’s behavior and attitude was a model for teachers and their interactions with students. The principal’s social networking posture was an important central component of school climate. The researchers noted, “The more principals were sought for professional 30

Ibid. Nienke Moolenaar, Alan J. Daly, and Peter J. C. Sleegers, “Occupying the Principal Position: Examining Relationships between Transformational Leadership, Social Network Position, and Schools’ Innovative Climate,” Educational Administration Quarterly, 46, no. 5 (2010): 623-633. doi:10.1177/0013161X10378689. 31

School Climate and Leadership

95

and personal advice, and the more closely connected they were to their teachers, the more willing teachers were to invest in change and the creation of new knowledge and practices which improved school climate.”32 Moreover, work-related closeness centrality was found to facilitate the relationship between transformational leadership and positive, innovative school climate. Principals that understood the positive influence of relationships and communication were more likely to lead a school climate that was positive than principals that relied instead on the self-perceived power of the position. Porter, Lemon, and Landry examined “power tactics” of elementary principals and the impact on school climate.33 The sample included 297 elementary teachers in North Dakota and Minnesota. Using an instrument that measures the use of power tactics (assertiveness, sanctions, ingratiation, rationality, and exchange) of principals, the teachers indicated that their principals most often used rationality and ingratiation and seldom used sanctions. In the findings, the researchers stated, “The power tactics of the principal influenced the school climate because of the teachers’ reaction to the power strategy of the principal–rationality and ingratiation led to more positive school climates.”34 The power tactics of principals and other leaders are seldom effective if they rely primarily on sanctions and coercion, and they often damage morale and threaten school climate. Contrast that with the leadership style advocated by Robert Greenleaf called “servant leadership.”35 Servant leadership is defined as a leader who is a servant first, who leads by positive example of identifying and meeting the needs of colleagues and others and creating a positive climate of relationships and support. Servant leadership is based on an ancient philosophy that was modernized by Greenleaf, who was influenced by the book Journey to the East written by Herman Hesse. 36 The servant leader shares power and helps people develop the skills necessary to be successful. The servant type of leadership and the correlation with school climate was studied by 32

Ibid. Ann W. Porter, Donald K. Lemon, and Richard G. Landry, “School Climate and Administrative Power Strategies of Elementary School Principals,” Psychological Reports, 65 (1989): 1267-1271. doi:10.2466/pr0.1989.65.3f.1267. 34 Ibid. 35 Robert K. Greenleaf, The Servant as Leader (Indianapolis: Robert K. Greenleaf Center, 1977). 36 Hermann Hesse, Journey to the East (Germany: Samuel Fischer Publishing, 1932). 33

96

Chapter Six

Black.37 Black examined the correlation between servant leadership and school climate in order to identify whether there was a relationship between principals' and teachers' perceived practice of servant leadership and of school climate. The researcher administered two validated quantitative instruments. The Organizational Leadership Assessment was used to measure the perceived servant leadership in the schools and the Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire-Revised was administered to measure the school's climate. The assessment instruments were given to 15 principals and 231 full-time teachers. After completion of the assessment instruments, a random sample of 10 percent of the teachers and principals participated in focus group interviews. The results of the study found a significant correlation between the prevalence of servant leadership and a positive school climate, where the more qualities of servant leadership that were attributed to a principal, the more likely it was that principal’s school had a positive school climate. Servant leadership was also the subject of a study to determine if there exists a correlation with school climate and leadership type at the secondary school level.38 Much of the research on school climate has focused on public schools, but this study included private schools. The study looked at teacher and administrator perceptions of school climate and servant leadership in private schools in Hawaii. The researcher surveyed both faculty and administrators for a total of 50 participants in four schools using the Organizational Leadership Assessment to measure perceptions of servant leadership within the four schools and the Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire–Revised (OCDQ-RS) to measure the perception of school climate in each school. According to the research findings, there was a correlation between servant leadership and a positive school climate. The servant leader created the tone for school climate in a caring and supportive culture, which encouraged communications, relationships, and collaboration. The beliefs and attitudes of teachers are affected by school climate, not only toward students but also toward projects, programs, and other changes that are implemented or encouraged by a school’s leadership staff. A study illustrating this was conducted to measure the beliefs and attitudes associated with the implementation of a program called Positive Action 37

Glenda L. Black, “Correlational Analysis of Servant Leadership and School Climate,” Journal of Inquiry and Practice, 13, no. 4 (2010): 437-466, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ914879.pdf. 38 Bryan R. Wolfe, “A Correlational Analysis of Servant Leadership and Secondary School Climate” (dissertation, Grand Canyon University, 2013).

School Climate and Leadership

97

Program.39 The purpose of the study was to explore the relationship between teacher beliefs and attitudes towards a prevention program and the influence of a school’s leadership support and perceptions of school connectedness–characteristics of school climate. The study sample included teachers from ten elementary schools that completed year-end process evaluation reports for each of two years. In the second year there were 171 teachers and 191 in year three of the multi-year trial. The researchers found that: .

Perceptions of school climate were indirectly related to classroom material usage and both indirectly and directly related to the use of school-wide activities. Program developers need to consider the importance of a supportive environment on program implementation and attempt to incorporate models of successful leadership and collaboration among teachers that foster a climate promoting cohesiveness, shared visions, and support.40

Projects and programs in schools that target certain behaviors are seldom effective if first the school climate is not stabilized. It is highly questionable to implement a project or program before making the effort to first improve school climate. The more positive the school climate, the more likely it is that targeted projects and programs will be successful, and that is determined in large part by the leadership of school administrators. The perception of school management and its impact on teachers has taken on many forms, but it is important to understand the interplay of school climate, leadership, teachers, and change. As Ozden stated in an expansion of the discussion about school change, it is more than implementation, setting objectives, and organizational structure–change is as much or more related to acceptance, values, beliefs, roles, and relationships, elements of a positive school climate as anything else.41 The participation of teachers in this process of change is the most fundamental component of successful change. Beychioglu and Aslan found that those leaders who do not recognize that change includes the dynamics associated with school climate and culture change often fail when they become de39

Michael W. Beets, Brian R. Flay, Samuel Vuchinich, Alan C. Acock, Kin-Kit Li, and Carol Allred, “School Climate and Teachers’ Beliefs and Attitudes Associated with Implementation of the Positive Action Program,” Prevention Science, 9, no. 4 (2008): 264-275. doi:10.1007/s11121-008-0100-2. 40 Ibid. 41 Y. Ozden, Educational Transformation: New Paradigms in Education (Ankara: Pegema, 2000).

98

Chapter Six

fensive and discount the fact that teachers are the essential component of change at the basic level.42 And when leaders do not understand that their leadership style is essential to interactions with teachers, any type of change is unsustainable in a school climate formulated under those conditions. This attitude also applies to leaders that have a low tolerance for a subordinate’s mistakes. They do not display compassion and do not use mistakes as learning opportunities to help employees learn and grown. According to Ardic and Polatci, the leadership dynamic can push teachers to feel as if they are expected to be almost perfect agents of change, which leads to ineffective change and a school climate of pressure and teacher burnout.43 The expectation of perfectionism sets a teacher on the path to emotional and physical distress that negatively impacts students because teacher preparation, use of technology, and classroom management are hampered in a school climate that does not tolerate mistakes, missteps, and imperfection in work-related behaviors.44 In another study of the triangle of leadership, school climate, and change, Kiremitch, Gencer, Demiray, and Unutmaz examined Turkish schools to determine the relationship between teachers’ work-related behaviors and perceptions of school climate, based on school leadership.45 The sample included 266 teachers in primary and secondary schools. Measures were taken from the Work-related Behavioral Observations and Experience Patterns Scale, the School Quality Management Culture Survey, and a questionnaire form for specifying demographical characteristics of teachers were employed in the study. The researchers concluded that,

42

Kadir Beychioglu and Mahire Aslan, “Change and Innovation as Main Dynamics in School Development: Administrators and Teachers’ Roles,” Journal of Faculty of Education, 8, no. 1 (2010): 153-173. 43 K. Ardic and S. Polatci, “Burnout Syndrome and the Other Side of Medallion: Engagement,” Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Services, 32 (2009): 21-46. 44 Kizilkaya Cumaoglu and Yelkin Coskun, “The Relationship between Academic Procrastination and Technology Usage of Teachers,” International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkic, 7, no. 4 (2012): 2237-2247. 45 Olcay Kiremitch, R. Timucin Gencer, Erdinc Demiray, and Volkan Unutmaz, “An Investigation on Work-Related Behaviors and Perceptions of School Quality Management Culture of K-12 Teachers,” Anthropologist, 18, no. 1 (2014): 165170, http://www.krepublishers.com/02-Journals/T-Anth/Anth-18-0-000-14-Web/ Anth-18-1-000-14-Abst-PDF/T-ANTH-18-1-165-14-1050-Kiremitci-O/T-ANTH18-1-165-14-1050-Kiremitci-O-Tx[16].pdf

School Climate and Leadership

99

The fact that the process of change and improvement includes many factors that should be considered may cause teachers to hesitate to participate in the process. In order to eliminate this hesitation, the institutional climate and culture of the school and the personal interest and professional attitudes of the teachers are of importance. At the management level that is predominant within the continuous development model followed by schools, total quality management, teacher competencies, and teacher performance are evaluated.46

The research supported the understanding that school climate is related to teacher and student performance, but it goes further than that. The research showed the correlation between effective change, school climate, and leadership. Leaders that initiate change without first attesting to the quality of the school climate are not likely to be successful over time, and worse, they may alienate teachers and further compromise the quality of school climate and the implementation of planned change or the capability of positive responses to other changes or needs. This last point was supported by a study in Chicago where it was found that elements of school climate, such as relationships and communications, can undermine the implementation of well-intended and potentially effective projects, programs, and ideas if the school climate is negative.47 The study, with the descriptive title of “I Don’t Want Your Nasty Pot of Gold,” found that in schools with dysfunctional relationships between and among teachers, parent, and school administrators, this dysfunction compromised or blatantly interfered with the implementation of school reforms. These findings also applied to schools where all parties had agreed to the goals and consequences before school reforms were implemented. The 16 schools in the study were trying to implement the Comer School Development Program, a holistic strategy that links children’s academic growth with their emotional wellness and social and moral development in a collaborative school climate congenial to learning. Teachers and school administrators were trained in the model and they agreed in a structured and confirming manner that the principles of the program were not only sound, but were also needed in their respective schools. The Comer Process puts the responsibility on principals, administrators, teachers, and parents to work together and agree on an action plan for the school, with both social and 46

Ibid. Charles M. Payne, “I Don’t Want Your Nasty Pot of Gold: Urban School Climate and Public Policy” (Northwestern University, Evanston: Institute for Policy Research, 1997), http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED412313.pdf. 47

100

Chapter Six

academic components. Teachers, principals, and parents make decisions collaboratively, in the best interests of the students. The Comer Process guides schools to set up a network of teams to manage the school and to address the various social and academic needs of the school. Despite the intensive preparation work, the collaborative nature of the preimplementation work, and the mutually developed and agreed-upon goals and activities, a negative school climate caused by inefficient leadership led to dysfunctional relationships and a failure of program implementation. This study clearly indicated that developing and maintaining a positive school climate is a leadership function, particularly if a school needs to initiate change or be prepared for change. An unstable school climate not only jeopardizes safety, compromises student achievement and stifles teachers, it also may be detrimental to the implementation of projects and programs intended to improve schools or that address specific problems within schools. This last point was the focus of a study by Malloy et al. to determine if teachers’ perceptions of school climate were related to the effectiveness of a school-wide intervention program. 48 Forty-six teachers in seven schools participated in the study, which focused on teachers’ perceptions of school climate in three dimensions: (1) openness to innovation; (2) use of participatory decisionmaking practices; and (3) supportive relationships. The schools implemented the Positive Action Program, also referred to as the SECD (social emotional and character development) program. The results of the study, “Suggested that perceptions of a school’s organizational climate impacts teachers’ implementation of SECD programs and have implications for school administrators…as they work to implement and sustain prevention programs in schools.”49 Implementation is dependent upon a stable school climate that is dependent upon leadership at the school level. This was also the finding in a study that looked at the role of leadership and school climate in a site-based school improvement effort.50 Thirty secondary schools drawn from three state education systems in Australia were included in the study. The findings indicated that there is “an important relationship be48

L.E. Molloy, Julia E. Moore, Jessica Trail, John James Van Epps, and Suellen Hopfer, “Understanding Real-World Implementation Quality and Active Ingredients of PBIS,” Prevention Science, 14, no. 6 (2013): 593-605, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4032114/. 49 Ibid. 50 Graham B. Dellar, “School Climate, School Improvement and Site-Based Management,” Learning Environments Research, 1, no. 3 (1998): 353-367, http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1009970210393#page-1.

School Climate and Leadership

101

tween organizational climate and the school’s capacity to implement and sustain authentic site-based management school improvement.” The researchers suggested that a measure of school climate should be conducted and considered prior to implementing any change model: “Where the prevailing organizational climate is negative, tailored front-end strategies designed to improve the school climate might be undertaken prior to the school embarking on school improvement initiatives.” The researchers found that stabilizing the school climate first is an essential component and pre-requisite to implementing change strategies to improve the school. The first strategy, in other words, is to improve and stabilize the school climate. Time and effort must be offered to show the commitment to change and improvement. How much is the school and the school district committed to school improvement? The amount of focus on school climate may be viewed by students and especially teachers as the answer to that question. Buluc and Gunes considered commitment in a study devised to determine the relationship between the perceptions of teachers on organizational justice and organizational commitment to school improvement and leadership.51 The study sample included 350 teachers working in 25 primary schools in Ankara, Turkey. Both the Organizational Justice Scale and the OCQ were used in order to determine the level of organizational commitment behaviors of teachers. The study found, That there is a positive and meaningful correlation found between organizational justice and organizational commitment behaviors of teachers. When the performance and efficiency of educational institutions are taken into consideration, it is known that organizational justice and organizational commitment are very important concepts. The principal’s fair treatment will affect not only the employee’s commitment to their institutions, but also the job satisfaction, motivation and the school climate positively.52

The study showed that principals can impair the effectiveness of a school and the health of the school climate when they jeopardize the school climate by acting unfairly and ignoring teacher and staff behavior 51

Bekir Buluc and Ahmet Melih Gunes, “Relationship between Organizational Justice and Organizational Commitment in Primary Schools,” Anthropologist, 18, no. 1 (2014): http://www.krepublishers.com/02-Journals/T-Anth/Anth-18-0-00014-Web/Anth-18-1-000-14-Abst-PDF/T-ANTH-18-1-145-14-1062-Buluc-B/TANTH-18-1-145-14-1062-Buluc-B-Tx[14].pdf 52 Ibid.

Chapter Six

102

that is contradictory to positive relationships. This type of behavior was perceived by teachers as showing a lack of commitment to improving the school and creating positive working conditions for teachers. The researchers added, “Teachers’ justice perceptions regarding their schools and principals have a positive impact on their commitment to their institutions. In this respect, when the principals treat teachers fairly, teachers’ commitment to their institutions and performance will improve.” Considering the research cited in this section, what can be done to improve school leadership in order to improve school climate? The good news is that leadership makes a difference and can make a significant difference in school districts. At the leadership level supportive, approachable, shared leadership, and visionary behaviors can result in a school climate exemplified by respect and engagement, autonomy and recognition, collaboration and innovation, socialization and personalization.53 A study by Borowiec-Koczera showed that effective leadership that impacts school climate can be a benefit of professional development for school administrators on school climate.54 The data were collected from a questionnaire and were based on three research questions: 1. What are the characteristics of a positive and supportive school climate? 2. What relationship exists between school leadership and school climate? 3. What differences exist over a three-year period with respect to administrative attitudes within the school climate? The researcher stated that, These results show the significant impact administration has over all aspects of school climate. By analyzing the responses of this questionnaire, this study showed that the school administrators’ participation in professional development activities had a positive impact on school climate.55

53

Maria P. Perez, “An Analytical Study of School Climate and Principal Leadership” (dissertation, Johnson and Wales University, 2015), http://scholarsarchive.jwu.edu/dissertations/AAI3704512. 54 Ann Borowiec-Koczera, “Professional Development for School Administrators: Effects on School Climate” (dissertation, Johnson and Wales University, 2001), http://scholarsarchive.jwu.edu/dissertations/AAI3270293. 55 Ibid.

School Climate and Leadership

103

This study is encouraging, in that it suggests that it is possible to train school administrators about the power of school climate as the basis for school improvement. A study by Segredo and Cistone indicated that the training of school administrators about school climate and culture should include an understanding that the “passive-avoidant” leadership style is detrimental to a positive school climate and that a school leader’s “emotional intelligence” is correlated with a school’s climate and culture.56 The researchers found when studying 57 elementary principals that Transformational Leadership (“identifying the needed change, creating a vision to guide the change through inspiration, and executing the change in tandem with committed members of the group”) and Transactional Leadership (“compliance through rewards and punishments–goals and expectations are clear”) are related to school climate, but the role of emotional intelligence is the awareness of the importance of effective, positive, and frequent communications and interactions with faculty, staff, and students and is the difference between Transformational Leadership and Transactional Leadership. Over time, Transformational Leadership is more aligned with a positive school climate, and of the other leadership types and styles, it is the most consistent with the principles of Servant Leadership. A positive school climate depends greatly and significantly on the leadership in the school, as does the sustainability of the school climate, because a positive school climate can become an expectation instead of a goal under effective leadership.

Chapter Six: School Climate and Leadership Summary Points School climate-conscious leadership in schools has a positive relationship with levels of student achievement. School leadership is critical to school climate and creating schools that are safe. The effect of teacher participation on student performance is mediated by school climate factors–sense of belonging, disciplinary climate, students’ morale, and student behavior that are influenced by school leadership.

56

Mirta R. Segredo, “The Relationships between Elementary School Principals’ Emotional Intelligence, Leadership Style, and School Culture” (dissertation, Florida International University, 2014), http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd/1457.

104

Chapter Six

A principal can have a direct effect on school effectiveness through actions that shape a school's learning climate. Authentic leadership behavior is when the principal accepts responsibility and does not abuse formal authority, fosters cooperation, encourages self-discipline, and supports interactive relations. Leader authenticity is influential in the development of the organizational climate of schools. Principals make a significant difference in school climate and are an essential element in perceptions of school climate, student discipline and attitudes, teacher self-esteem and sense of efficacy, and respect. It is important to highlight the impact of the leadership’s role in creating a positive school climate that affects the attitude of teachers toward all students. Characteristics of leaders that promote a positive school climate include the willingness to listen to teachers and engage them in decisionmaking. How effectively students transition from elementary schools to secondary schools is dependent on school climate. Students who make the difficult transition from elementary school to middle school are more likely to be successful in a middle school climate of openness and authentic support from the middle school leadership. School leaders that focus on the importance of a positive school climate should also understand the value of including transition components in school climate development. Strength of communications and relationship building in an administrator’s leadership style and administrative priorities are the determining factor for the effectiveness of school climate. If the principal supports students and teachers, provides adequate resources, and uses influence on behalf of the teachers and students, the school climate is more likely to be positive and there is a positive influence on student learning. Teachers’ evaluation of the effectiveness of principals is linked to the principal’s ability to create a positive school culture. Principals can be the key to establishing a respectful school context that can facilitate teaching and learning. One of the major components of school climate is relationships, how effectively people in a school communicate and relate to each other, teacher to student, teacher to teacher, teacher to principal, and principals to students and teacher, and often times, it is the principal that sets the tone for positive (or negative) relationships.

School Climate and Leadership

105

Transformational leadership is positively associated with a school’s positive and innovative climate. The more faculty and staff are encouraged by the principal to seek the principal’s opinion and advice about professional and personal issues, the more positive the school climate is rated. The more principals are sought for professional and personal advice, and the more closely connected they are to their teachers, the more willing teachers are to invest in change and the creation of new knowledge and practices. Principals that understand the positive influence of relationships and communication are more likely to lead a school climate that is positive than principals that rely instead on the self-perceived power of the position. The power tactics of principals and other leaders are seldom effective if they rely primarily on sanctions and coercion, and they often damage morale and threaten school climate. Servant leadership is defined as a leader who is a servant first, who leads by positive example of identifying and meeting the needs of colleagues and others and creating a positive climate of relationships and support. There is a significant correlation between the prevalence of servant leadership and a positive school climate; the more qualities of servant leadership assigned to a principal there are, the more likely that principal’s school will have a positive school climate. The servant leader sets the tone for school climate in a caring and supportive culture, which encourages communications, relationships, and collaboration. The more positive the school climate, the more likely targeted projects and programs will be successful. The dynamics associated with school climate and culture change often fail when leaders become defensive and discount the fact that teachers are the essential component of change at the basic level. Leaders that initiate change without first attesting to the quality of the school climate are not likely to be successful over time, and worse, they may alienate teachers and further compromise the quality of school climate and the implementation of planned change or the capability of positive responses to other changes or needs. Where the prevailing organizational climate is negative, tailored frontend strategies designed to improve the school climate might be undertaken prior to the school embarking on school improvement initiatives

106

Chapter Six

Training of school administrators about school climate and culture should include an understanding that the “passive-avoidant” leadership style is detrimental to a positive school climate and that a school leader’s “emotional intelligence” is correlated with a school’s climate and culture. A positive school climate depends greatly and significantly on the leadership in the school, as does the sustainability of the school climate, because under the right conditions with effective leadership a positive school climate can become an expectation instead of a goal.

CHAPTER SEVEN SCHOOL CLIMATE AND STUDENT DISCIPLINE AND SAFETY

“School climate offers significant potential for enhancing both the understanding and the prevention of school violence.” —Wayne Welch1

A January 8, 2014 Dear Colleague letter from the United States Secretary of Education Office of Civil Rights stated that schools are expected to balance the maintenance of safe and orderly schools with allowing and promoting conditions for learning (citing the necessity to reduce school disruption and student misconduct); support and reinforce positive behavior and character development; and help students succeed by implementing a wide range of strategies.2 The letter points out the research of complaints and data reviews that illustrate disproportionate student discipline consequences and an over-reliance on punitive sanctions, rather than reasonable consequences and prevention implementation. However, teachers and administrators continue to cite student discipline as one of the most challenging problems facing them on a daily basis in addition to apathy and disrespect.3 A study by the United States Secret Service and the United States Department of Education on incidences of planned attacks in

1

Wayne N. Welsh, “The Effects of School Climate on School Disorder,” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 567, no. 1 (2000): 88-107. doi:10.1177/000271620056700107. 2 Catherine E. Lhamon, Dear Colleague Letter, United States Departments of Education Office of Civil Rights, October 1, 2014, http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-resourcecomp-201410.pdf. 3 National Center for Educational Statistics, Public School Safety and Discipline: 2013-2014. Institute of Education Sciences (Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Education, 2013).

108

Chapter Seven

schools concluded that a positive school climate is the central tool in preventing school violence.4 A number of studies have shown a correlation between over-reliance on punitive discipline actions, most notably out-of-school suspension and expulsion and negative academic outcomes and increased student absences, social emotional problems, and increases in juvenile detention, while the need for safe schools remains a top priority for parents.5 The body of research that studies the possible links between school climate, student discipline, and safety continues to expand. Many of the studies consider the broader view of prevention and intervention to include the wide range of benefits that stem from improving school climate for all students thereby reducing the conditions for misbehaviors such as bullying. One of the most troubling student discipline and safety issues facing many schools has been and continues to be bullying, and all of the complications that are related to bullying. Bullying has proven to be a serious detriment to school safety. It is imperative for schools to understand the link between school climate and bullying, as well as other behaviors that threaten school safety and jeopardize student academic outcomes. For example, it behooves schools to examine elements within a school’s climate

4

U.S. Secret Service and U.S. Department of Education, “Threat Assessment in Schools: A Guide to Managing Threatening Situations and to Creating Safe School Climates” (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 2004), https://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/safety/threatassessmentguide.pdf. 5 Emily Arcia, “Achievement and Enrollment Status on Suspended Students,” Education and Urban Society, 38, no. 3 (2006): 359-369, doi:10.1177/0013124506286947; Sheryl A. Hemphill, John W. Toumbourou, Todd I. Herrenkohl, Barbara J. McMorris, and Richard F. Catalano, “The Effect of School Suspensions and Arrests on Subsequent Adolescent Antisocial Behavior in Australia and the United States,” Journal of Adolescent Health, 39, no. 5 (2006): 736-744, doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.05.010; Sheryl A. Hemphill, Todd I. Herrenkohl, Stephanie M. Plenty, John W. Toumbourou, Richard F. Catalano, and Barbara J. McMorris, “Pathways from School Suspension to Adolescent Nonviolent Antisocial Behavior in Students in Victoria, Australia and Washington State, United States,” Journal of Community Psychology, Volume 40, Issue 3 (2012): 301-318, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3774047/; Virginia Costenbader and Samia Markson, “School Suspension: A Study with Secondary School Students” Journal of School Psychology, 36, no. 1 (1998): 59-82, doi:10.1016/S0022-4405(97)00050-2; Phi Delta Kappa International, The 2013 PDK/Gallup Poll on Public Schools (Bloomington: Delta Kappa International, 2013).

School Climate and Student Discipline and Safety

109

that produce situations and conditions where bullying and other forms of student harassment and intimidation are prevalent. A study by Cerezo and Ato considered social status, gender, classroom climate and bullying among adolescent pupils as the possible antecedents to bullying that jeopardizes safety.6 More specifically, the study contemplated how relationships, particularly social relationships and elements of school climate in the classroom, were related to bullying. The sample included 17 classes of students in secondary schools in Spain, comprising 421 pupils, aged between 14 and 17 years old–241 boys and 180 girls. The findings of the study suggested that instead of focusing on just the students involved in bullying incidents, a more effective method of prevention and intervention would be an overall, school-wide emphasis on building positive relationships between and among students and staff (using epidemiological terms–a population based approach). The researchers stated, The school climate holds the key to intervention, not focusing on the bullying students. This study takes to the forefront that there is a general lack of consideration towards other pupils in schools (especially among boys). It is necessary to change the target for satisfactory interventions because it is not enough to attend to pupils at risk. Rather, it is essential to improve the social climate and thus foster greater awareness of the problems of others in schools.7

This research made a critically important point about focusing on school climate conditions of schools rather than only reacting to symptoms of a negative school climate, such as bullying. The importance of viewing school climate as a prevention concept was supported by a study that looked at the challenges to school safety when students do not feel that the school climate includes positive relationships between students and staff members. 8 The researchers studied the link between a supportive school climate and student willingness to seek help for bullying and threats of violence. The study investigated student perceptions of positive relationship and sense of support from school staff and 6

Fuensanta Cerezo and Manuel Ato, “Social Status, Gender, Classroom Climate and Bullying Among Adolescents Pupils,” Annals of Psychology, 26, no. 1 (2010): 137-144, http://www.siis.net/documentos/ficha/183784.pdf. 7 Ibid. 8 Megan Eliot, Dewey Cornell, Anne Gregory, and Xitao Fan, “Supportive School Climate and Student Willingness to Seek Help for Bullying and Threats of Violence,” Journal of School Psychology, 48, no. 6 (2010): 533-553. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2010.07.001.

110

Chapter Seven

consequently student willingness to share information about bullying and threats of violence at school. One of the basic elements of a safe school is a school climate that encourages students to report concerns about safety and concerns about other students’ ideation and actions to teachers or school administrators. The study sample came from students who participated in the Virginia High School Safety Study, which included 7,318 ninth-grade students in 291 high schools. The results indicated that students who feel their teachers and other school staff are supportive and respond to student concerns are more likely to report bullying and share threats of violence with an adult in the school. Additionally, the researchers found that in schools with a positive school climate and strong studentstaff relationships and trust, there was less of a discrepancy in helpseeking attitudes between girls and boys. According to the researchers, the study findings, “suggest that efforts by school staff to provide a supportive climate are a potentially valuable strategy for engaging students in the prevention of bullying and threats of violence.”9 The effect of school climate on bullying based on an examination of the relations among self-esteem, normative beliefs, and bullying “perpetration” was the subject of a study by Gendron, Williams, and Guerra.10 The study included a longitudinal sample of 7,299 ethnically diverse students from 78 elementary, middle, and high schools and centers across the state of Colorado in grades 5, 8, and 11. There were two data collection points one year apart, using self-report surveys that measure self-esteem, school climate, and normative approval. According to the researchers, When perceptions of school climate were negative (indicating poor school climate), high self-esteem predicted higher levels of bullying perpetration. In contrast, when perceptions of school climate were positive, high selfesteem predicted lower levels of bullying perpetration.11

Clearly, the effect of school climate on self-esteem is significant and that effect on bullying is powerful, according to the study. The study also suggested that unless or until school climate becomes more positive, those personal characteristics like self-esteem that prevent or discourage behav9

Ibid. Brian P. Gendron, Kirk R. Williams, and Nancy G. Guerra, “An Analysis of Bullying among Students within Schools: Estimating the Effects of Individual Normative Beliefs, Self-Esteem, and School Climate,” Journal of School Violence, 10, no. 2 (2011): 150-164. doi:10.1080/15388220.2010.539166. 11 Ibid. 10

School Climate and Student Discipline and Safety

111

iors such as bullying will languish, which can jeopardize the safety and well-being of students and staff members. The relationship between perceived school climate and the prevalence of bullying behavior in schools was also the genesis of a study of 369 primary school students in Greece who participated in a study where they completed the Peer Experience Questionnaire, the School Climate Scale, and the Risky Behavior Scale. The study replicated findings from other studies that negative perceptions of school climate plus participation in risky behaviors were predictive of peer-to-peer bullying behavior. The combination of risky behavior and a negative school climate combined to increase the likelihood and prevalence of bullying behavior substantially. Another study found that a positive school climate can mediate the propensity for bullying behavior at the school-wide level. The New Zealand study discovered that involvement in bullying was related directly to feelings of empathy, or the lack thereof, and relationships actual or absent in school climate.12 Both bullies and victims of bullying felt little or no connection to the school and had little sense of relationship with other students and teachers. Consequently, the absence of reinforcement of prosocial behavior within a negative school climate seemed to foster bullying victimization and allow bullying without impunity. How long the victimization continues is an important consideration in trying to understand behavior such as bullying in an unstable and unhealthy school climate. Turner et al. took a longitudinal research view on the degree of bullying and peer victimization and the impact of school climate, including academic and group support and school identification (student sense of connected or disconnected and sense of belonging), which were conceptualized as related but distinct constructs.13 The sample included 492 Australian students in grades 7 through 10 with an average age of 15 years, evenly divided between male and female. The researchers examined predictors of anxiety, depression, school climate, and school identification. The researchers found, 12

Theodoros Giovazolias, Elias Kourkoutas, Effrosyni Mitsopoulou, and Maria Georgiadi, “The Relationship between Perceived School Climate and the Prevalence of Bullying Behavior in Greek Schools: Implications for Preventive Inclusive Strategies” Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5 (2010): 2208-2215. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.437. 13 Isobel Turner, Katherine J. Reynolds, Eunro Lee, Emina Subasic, and David Bromhead, “Well-Being, School Climate, and the Social Identity Process: A Latent Growth Model Study of Bullying Perpetration and Peer Victimization,” School Psychology Quarterly, 29, no. 3 (2014): 320-325. doi:10.1037/spq0000074.

112

Chapter Seven Academic support and group support were the strongest predictors of change in bullying and victimization. Positive change in school identification also predicted a decrease in bullying behavior over time. An increase in depression or anxiety across time predicted an increase in rates of both bullying and victimization over time. On a practical note, school-based intervention programs may benefit from an approach that aims to target the school climate, social identity with the school, and promote individual psychological well-being.14

Victimization cannot be adequately addressed with the belief and approach that bullying behavior is isolated from a school’s climate. Bullying is a manifestation of an unhealthy school climate, and bullying prevention and intervention programs are less likely to be effective if implemented in a school with a negative school climate. Some school administrators have tried to isolate the problems and causes of bullying by imposing more severe sanctions, in hopes that these types of practices will lower bullying and victimization and improve safety and security. A study by Gregory et al. studied the authoritative discipline theory that combines structure and support within school climate.15 The researchers used a sample of well over 7,300 ninth grade students and almost 3,000 teachers. The participants were randomly selected from 290 high schools. The study found that consistency in discipline policy enforcement combined with the availability of caring and supportive adults led to less bullying and victimization, and thus improved safety. The researchers concluded, “These findings suggest that discipline practices should not be polarized into a ‘get tough’ versus ‘give support’ debate because both structure and support contribute to school safety for adolescents.”16 The researchers referred to the importance of structure (rules and procedures) and support (assistance for students) within the framework of a positive school climate. The binary and often fluctuating effort to either get tough or forgive misbehavior does not benefit students and in most cases jeopardizes the stability, safety, and promising outcomes of a positive school climate. Some states have tried to use legislation to create more severe consequences for bullying, harassment, and intimidation, such as South Caroli14

Ibid. Anne Gregory, Dewey Cornell, Xitao Fan, Peter Sheras, Tse-Hua Shih, and Francis Huang, “Authoritative School Discipline: High School Practices Associated with Lower Bullying and Victimization,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, no. 2 (2010): 483-496. 16 Ibid. 15

School Climate and Student Discipline and Safety

113

na. Whether these efforts have been successful is debatable. A study addressed the effects of South Carolina’s Safe School Climate Act of 2006. Terry examined the outcome of South Carolina’s legislation, which was intended to limit and punish “harassment, intimidation, or bullying” among public school students, and it required school districts to establish policies to address this issue before January 1, 2007.17 According to Terry, the South Carolina Safe School Climate Act “failed to significantly change the culture of school in South Carolina.” The forms of student victimization cannot be adequately addressed through legislation. The author stated, If we radically change the culture of our schools to limit the effects of bullying, intimidation, and harassment, we need to formulate long-term prevention strategies to affect change. Legal remedies and punitive measures for bullies alone have not solved the problem.18

Trying to correct problems such as bullying with more stringent consequences, or the threat of more severe consequences, seldom works effectively. Behavior like bullying is symptomatic of a negative or unhealthy school climate. Instead, modifying school climate variables has been found to have a more significant effect on preventing behavior that victimizes students and that jeopardizes the safety of students. At least one study found that school climates where teachers practice unfair and inconsistent classroom management actually perpetuated bullying behavior and more widespread victimization.19 The good news from the study that involved over 600 Italian students aged 11 to 13 years old is that intervention programs that aim to prevent school bullying through modifying school climate down to the classroom level can be effective, because they impact overall school climate and student perception of school climate and adult support. Along the same theme of student perception of school climate, researchers studied student perceptions of school climate and how that influ17

David L. Stader, Thomas J. Graca, and David W. Stevens, “Teachers and the Law: Evolving Legal Issues,” The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues, and Ideas, 83, no. 3 (2010): 73-75. doi:10.1080/00098651003662148. 18 Ibid. 19 Michela Lenzi, Alessio Vieno, Gianluca Gini, Tiziana Pozzoli, Massimiliano Pastore, Massimo Santinello, and Frank J. Elgar, “Perceived Teacher Unfairness, Instrumental Goals, and Bullying Behavior in Early Adolescence,” Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29, no. 10 (2013): 1834-1849. doi:10.1177/0886260513511694.

114

Chapter Seven

enced their choice to either “upstand, bystand, or join perpetrators of bullying.”20 Upstand means the student stood up for the bullying victim; bystand means the student stood by and let the bully continue to harass a student; and join means simply that the student participated, perhaps reluctantly, in the bullying behavior. In the study, 23 eighth graders in four middle schools were interviewed using the grounded theory approach.21 From the study, the researchers identified four school-level indicators relevant to students’ perceptions of school climate of safety, order, care, and empowerment and how those indicators “combined to configure three types of perceived school climates–negligent, authoritarian, and cohesive.” Negligent school climates seldom produced students who would upstand or help another student who was being bullied, where a cohesive school climate encouraged upstand behavior to help the bullying victim. An authoritarian school climate promoted safety and order but care and empowerment were frequently lacking, which were essential in creating a school climate that encouraged students to support each other and intervene on behalf of bullying victims. Bullying is only one aspect of a negative school climate that can compromise safety and security. There are other outcomes and correlations, some of which include victimization beyond verbal bullying and social isolation. Some studies have shown the connection between school climate, bullying, and latent violent behavior. In a study of Korean students, the researchers studied adolescent bullying and the effect of bullying and school climate, as well as the role of parental control in later emerging violent behavior.22 The researcher also wanted to know if school climate or parental control mediated bullying or violent behavior. Over 600 juveniles (310 involved in violent behavior and slightly fewer than 300 involved in non-violent behavior such as theft) with involvement in the juvenile court system were identified and asked to complete questionnaires about their school experience, school climate, and parental supervision. Seventy-six (13 percent) reported having experienced emotional, but not 20

Silvia D. Ferrans and Robert L. Selman, “How Students’ Perceptions of the School Climate Influence Their Choice to Upstand, Bystand, or Join Perpetrators of Bullying,” Harvard Educational Review, 84, no. 2 (2014):162-187. doi:10.17763/haer.84.2.h488313410l651mm. 21 Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss, The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research (New York, Aldine de Gruyter Publishers, 1967). 22 Seokjin Jeong, Jaya Davis, and Youngsun Han, “Who Becomes More Violent among Korean Adolescents? Consequences of Victimization in School,” Criminal Behavior and Mental Health, 25, no. 2 (2014): 141-155. doi:10.1002/cbm.1919.

School Climate and Student Discipline and Safety

115

physical bullying at school and 31 (5 percent) experienced physical bullying (physical violence). The researchers found that, Violent offending was over twice as likely as property offending to be associated with emotional bullying history, but three times less likely with physical bullying. In addition, parental control increased the likelihood of violent offending or other delinquency by 15%. Our overarching finding of a relationship between childhood experience of bullying and later delinquency is in line with Western findings. Where, however, the latter are equivocal on risk of later violence perpetration, we found that being emotionally bullied raises the risk of becoming violent.23

The additional importance of this study was the finding that, contrary to some Western studies, parental control is not a protective factor. However, the study found that school climate can be a risk factor that is within the control of schools to change. While there have been many studies about bullying, there are relatively few studies that consider the role of school climate on the effectiveness of bullying prevention programs. A study by Low and Van Ryzin examined the moderating role of school climate on the impacts of a stand-alone bullying prevention curriculum and the impact of two different dimensions of school climate across both student and staff perceptions.24 The study was conducted in 33 elementary schools over one year where the Steps to Respect program was implemented. Schools were randomly assigned to the bullying intervention program or on a waiting list that served as the control group. Outcome measures (pre-to-post) were obtained from all school staff, a randomly selected subset of third through fifth grade teachers in each school, and all students in classrooms of randomly selected teachers. Results showed that positive school climate was strongly related to reductions in bullying-related attitudes and behaviors. According to the researchers, “Findings suggest positive psychosocial climate (from both staff and student perspective) plays a foundational role in bullying prevention, and can optimize effects of stand-alone programs.” As mentioned before, for intervention programs to be fully effective, the school climate must be positive or at least stable. It is folly for a school to implement a program for a targeted problem, such as bullying, in a negative school climate that 23

Ibid. Sabina K. Low and Mark Van Ryzin, “The Moderating Effects of School Climate on Bullying Prevention Efforts,” School Psychology Quarterly, 29, no. 3 (2014): 306-319. doi:10.1037/spq0000073. 24

116

Chapter Seven

is probably causing the problem in the first place, or at least exacerbating the problem. Implementation issues are related to the school staff’s willingness to embrace the intervention program. If staff members are not willing to intervene, for example, to stop bullying, they are probably not fully committed to implement a bullying intervention program either, because their responsibility for implementing a program will be viewed as an additional layer of responsibility on top of what they have to do already. They are less likely to see their role and the interconnecting role of all adults in addressing student misbehavior if the strategy does not address the larger issues related to school climate. Teachers and other staff members have a good sense of student issues and how school climate is related to safety and security. Research indicated that teachers and staff are able to predict student aggression and their willingness to intervene in student aggression is based on their perception of school climate. Espelage, Polanin, and Low collected data from 3,616 middle school students in the sixth grade who completed a survey that measures bullying, aggression, victimization, and willingness to intervene in bullying situations.25 Also, 1,477 teachers and staff completed a school climate survey. The researchers found that as teacher and staff perceived aggression as a problem in their school, students reported greater bully perpetration, fighting, peer victimization, and less willingness to intervene to stop the bullying. In an important message to schools, they also found that teachers and staff in positive school environments were more likely to intervene and prevent bullying than teachers and staff working in negative school environments. In a model where all school environment scales were entered together, a school commitment to prevent bullying was associated with less bullying, fighting, and peer victimization. According to the researchers, “We conclude that efforts to address bullying and victimization should involve support from the school administration.” Again, unless the school focuses on the larger issue of school climate and involves all of the resources available to improve school climate, such as the expertise of school psychologists and school counselors, teachers and staff members are less likely to participate in efforts to address aggressive behavior that can imperil school safety.

25

Dorothy L. Espelage, Joshua R. Polanin, and Sabina K. Low, “Teacher and Staff Perceptions of School Environment as Predictors of Student Aggression, Victimization, and Willingness to Intervene in Bullying Situations,” School Psychology Quarterly, 29, no. 3 (2014): 287-305. doi:10.1037/spq0000072.

School Climate and Student Discipline and Safety

117

Espelage, Polanin, and Low also suggest that schools create a school climate council consisting of students, parents, and teachers, and that they administer school climate measures, as well as identify specific school improvement targets from these data. They also point out that it is essential to engage all stakeholders in the ongoing school improvement plan. The development of a long-term and systematic school-wide plan was the subject of a study by Ertesvag and Roland, where they contemplated the school’s organizational structure as part of the school climate and thus what impact it had on behavior, such as bullying.26 The researchers looked at 11 schools with high rates of bullying and ten schools with low rates of bullying and sampled 18,767 students and 1,932 teachers in 85 elementary, secondary, and combined grade-level schools. The results showed that teachers in schools with high rates of bullying reported weaker leadership, low teacher affiliation, and little collaborative activity than did teachers in schools with low rates of bullying. In other words, elements that define a school climate, starting with leadership, are related to student behavior. In schools with a positive school climate, based on support from the school leader, there were fewer student discipline issues and less student bullying and victimization; therefore, the schools were safer. The prevalence and importance of school climate and bullying on student aggression were dramatically illustrated in a study that linked concerns about bullying to concerns about violence in dating relationships.27 According to the researchers school climate is an important context for understanding risk factors for adolescent attitudes about aggression overall, and not just in the school setting. They collected results from 27,074 adolescents at 58 high schools via a Web-based survey. The results indicated that adolescents who had been bullied were more concerned about both physical and emotional dating violence among students at their school than students who had not been bullied. According to the researchers, “School climates that were perceived by students as safer were rated as having lower levels of teen dating violence. Findings also indicated that schools perceived as being unsafe may be an important context for target-

26

Sigrun K. Ertesvag and Erling Roland, “Professional Cultures and Rates of Bullying,” School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 26, no. 2 (2014): 195-214. doi:10.1080/09243453.2014.944547. 27 Katrina J. Debnam, Sarah L. Johnson, and Catherine P. Bradshaw, “Examining the Association between Bullying and Adolescent Concerns about Teen Dating Violence,” Journal of School Health, 84, no. 7 (2014): 421-428. dio:10.1111/josh.12170.

118

Chapter Seven

ing dating violence prevention efforts.”28 It is important to understand the importance of this study. It links school climate to bullying behavior and links both to attitudes about social relationships, behavior, and attitudes that extend beyond the school setting. Another set of behaviors that extend beyond the school setting are those involved in cyberbullying. Williams and Guerra undertook a study with 3,339 students in grades 5, 8, and 11 from 78 schools who completed a questionnaire.29 One year later, 2,293 students from 65 schools in the original sample participated in a follow-up study using questionnaires. Questionnaires included measures of bullying perpetration and victimization, normative beliefs about bullying, perceptions of peer social support, and perceptions of school climate. The results showed that the highest prevalence rates were for verbal bullying, followed by physical bullying, and then by cyberbullying. Cyberbullying peaked in middle school and declined in high school. According to the researchers, all three types of bullying were significantly related to normative beliefs approving of bullying, negative school climate, and negative peer support. Also, students in negative school climates were more likely to report cyberbullying, as well as the other two forms of bullying. Bullying continues to be a source of concern for schools across the nation and the world; however, there is a broader issue of other types of misbehavior that are related to school climate and that can be impacted in negative or positive ways because of school climate. Yet, too often explanations of disruptive behavior or school disorder are not fully explored. Welsh stated that this oversight occurs because of two primary reasons: (1) institutional/organizational explanations of school disorder ignore school climate and (2) research and policy development has too often been based on inadequate and incomplete attention to measures of school disorder.30 As Welsh pointed out, “Like people, schools have their own characteristic personalities, or climates.” He used survey responses from students in middle schools in Philadelphia as the basis for his research on the effects of school climate, as well as individual student characteristics (such as age, sex, race, and dimensions of bonding) on different measures of school disorder, including victimization, avoidance, perceptions of safety, misconduct, and offending. Welsh concluded that, “School climate offers sig28

Ibid. Ibid. 30 Wayne N. Welsh, “The Effects of School Climate on School Disorder,” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 567, no. 1 (2000): 88-107. doi:10.1177/000271620056700107. 29

School Climate and Student Discipline and Safety

119

nificant potential for enhancing both the understanding and the prevention of school violence.” Aggressive student behaviors of various types have been found to correlate with school climate, particularly with the social aspects of school climate and relationships. Goldstein, Young, and Boyd studied this relationship to determine the effects on adolescents’ perceptions of a hostile school climate and the likelihood of their participation in aggressive behavior.31 The sample of the study included 1,335 African-American and European students in grades 7 through 12. According to the researchers, “The results indicated that exposure to relational aggression is associated with several components of adolescents’ perception of the school climate.” Adolescents exposed to high levels of relational aggression perceived their school to be less safe. These results suggested the link of a hostile school climate to the safety of students and staff members at school, because of the increased likelihood of aggressive behavior in response to relational issues between and among adolescents. It is also important to note that with male students the increase in relational aggression in a hostile school climate led to more incidents of weapons. This last finding, regarding weapons, is important beyond the obvious increase in danger at school by the presence of weapons. Typically, schools depend on students to report when another student has a weapon. But what happens when students fail to inform teachers and administrators about the presence of a weapon on campus? The failure to inform staff members of possible dangerous situations at school may be a sign of lack of trust, which is a byproduct of a school climate that does not promote engagement, connectedness, and relationships. Connell, Barbieri, and Gonzalez found that students’ willingness to report that other students were carrying a weapon was linked to school climate. 32 Students that reported positive school climate elements such as school engagement and positive relationships were more likely to report weapons and other potential threats to school safety. Students who perceived their school climate as positive seemed to take ownership and felt like school safety was part of their responsibility. Students in negative 31

Sara E. Goldstein, Amy Young, and Carol Boyd, “Relational Aggression at School: Associations with School Safety and Social Climate,” Journal of Youth Adolescence, 37 (2008): 641-654. doi:10.1007/s10964-007-9192-4. 32 Nadine M. Connell, Nina Barbieri, and Jennifer M. Reingle Gonzalez, “Understanding School Effects on Students’ Willingness to Report Peer Weapon Carrying,” Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 13, no. 3 (2015): 258-289. doi:10.1177/1541204014544512.

120

Chapter Seven

school climates did not feel the same way, thus the safety of the school was compromised even more due to unreported weapons. The link between students’ “Code of Silence” and school climate also applies to students’ willingness to intervene in another student’s dangerous plans, according to a study by Syversten, Flanagan, and Stout. 33 In the study, 1,933 adolescent students ranging in age from 13 to 17 from 13 different schools, including middle and high schools, were presented with a scenario about a student’s plan “to do something dangerous” at school. The students were asked how likely they were to respond in the four choices provided: (1) intervene directly to stop the student; (2) tell a teacher or principal; (3) discuss the situation with a friend but not an adult; and (4) do nothing. The researchers found that, Students with positive perceptions of their schools were more likely to say they would do something rather than ignore their peer's dangerous intentions. These relationships were mediated by students' beliefs that confiding in a teacher may have unfavorable consequences. Findings from this study support the important role schools play in creating a culture where students take responsibility for one another.34

Bonding with a school and in the social context with other students is an important component of creating a safe school. As noted with student willingness to report potentially dangerous situations at school, the willingness of students to become engaged in school is tied to a school climate that promotes and offers opportunities for students to bond with the school, the staff, and with other students. Bonding and connectedness are essential elements of a positive school climate where students feel safe and supported. The importance of bonding was studied in a research project that aimed to measure if students who feel like they have bonded with the school are more academically successful, socially competent, and less likely to misbehave and participate in anti-social, aggressive behavior. 35 The sample included 4,558 middle school students in grades 6 to 8 who completed a survey. Over 91% of the 33

Amy K. Syversten, Constance A. Flannagan, and Michael D. Stout, “Code of Silence: Students' Perceptions of School Climate and Willingness to Intervene in a Peer's Dangerous Plan,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, no. 1 (2009): 219-232, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0013246. 34 Ibid. 35 Bruce G. Simmons-Morton, Aria Davis Crump, Denise L. Haynie, and Keith E. Saylo, “Student-School Bonding and Adolescent Problem Behavior,” Health Education Research, 13, no. 1 (1999): 99-107. doi:10.1093/her/14.1.99.

School Climate and Student Discipline and Safety

121

students (4,263) completed the survey in a manner that was reliable. The researchers found that, Student–school bonding was positively correlated with school adjustment and perceived school climate, but inversely correlated with problem behavior. Problem behavior was significantly higher among males than females and among students in higher grades. Conversely, school bonding, climate and adjustment were significantly higher among females than males, but declined significantly from one grade to the next. The data support the conclusion that school bonding is associated with problem behavior.36

The researchers opined that focusing on school climate designed to increase student-school bonding can prevent disruptive and aggressive behavior and provide a safer school for students and staff members. Some efforts to prevent school misbehavior have frequently oversimplified the complexity of the issues. It is important to consider students’ perception of school climate and link that perception to student behavior. That was the purpose of the study by Wang, Selman, Dishion, and Stormshak.37 The researchers used an ecological framework to study the probability of a student’s perception of school climate and involvement in problem behaviors. The study sample included 677 students from eight schools in grades 6 to 8. According to the findings, The proportions of students reporting a positive school climate perception decreased over the middle school years for both genders, while the level of problem behavior engagement increased. The findings suggested that students who perceived higher levels of school discipline and order and more positive student–teacher relationships were associated with a lower probability and frequency of subsequent behavioral problems.38

To this group of students, it was important for the school to have structure and rules, primarily for safety and security reasons, and yet it was equally important for students to experience positive interactions and build positive relationships with teachers. These positive features of a school climate reduced the likelihood of problem behaviors. It is also very important to note that students’ sense of a positive school climate diminished each year they were in middle school, so that by the time they reached the eighth grade a significant number of them did not express confidence in 36

Ibid. Ibid. 38 Ibid. 37

122

Chapter Seven

the helpful and supportive tendencies of school, which may explain the spike in student discipline referrals in the eighth grade for many middle schools (see The Suspension Spike: Changing the Discipline Culture in NYC’s Middle Schools).39 This trajectory of problem behavior in the middle school years has been attributed to lack of academic support, behavior management issues, the need for teacher social support, as well as peer social report. Wang and Dishion conducted a longitudinal study that looked at those four dimensions to determine the effect of each on the middle school trajectory of problem behavior.40 In the study, the researchers tracked 1,030 adolescent sixth grade students through their eighth grade school year. The researchers reported that, “The findings indicated that all the dimensions of school climate declined, and behavioral problems and deviant peer affiliation increased. The prediction of problem behavior from peer affiliation was moderated by adolescents’ perceptions of school climate.” The study showed that a decline in academic progress and an increase in problem behavior was related to a corresponding increasingly negative perception of school as adolescents in middle school tracked through grades 6, 7, and 8, which suggests that evaluating and identifying school climate factors that are negatively impacting student behavior is critical for improving student behavior, increasing safety, and improving academic outcomes. If middle school students (grades 6 through 8) experience declining school climate and corresponding increase in problem behavior, what then is the correlation between the two elements when the students enter high school? LeBranc, Swisher, Vitaro, and Tremblay studied the longitudinal relationship between school social climate and anti-social behavior, including the behavior of students during the earlier grades.41 The 10-year study included 1,233 students from 217 public and private high schools. 39

John C. Liu, The Suspension Spike: Changing the Discipline Culture in NYC’s Middle Schools (New York: New York City Government Report, July 2013), https://comptroller.nyc.gov/wpcontent/uploads/2013/07/NYC_MiddleSchools_Summary.pdf. 40 Mong-Te Wang and Thomas J. Dishion, “The Trajectories of Adolescents’ Perceptions of School Climate, Deviant Peer Affiliation, and Behavioral Problems during the Middle School Years,” Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22, no. 1 (2012): 40-53. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2011.00763.x. 41 Line LeBlanc, Raymond Swisher, Frank Vitaro, and Richard E. Tremblay, “High School Social Climate and Antisocial Behavior: A 10-Year Longitudinal and Multilevel Study,” Journal of Research on Adolescence, 18, no. 3 (2008): 395419. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2008.00565.x.

School Climate and Student Discipline and Safety

123

The level of disruptive behavior was recorded yearly from ages 6 to 12. Then high school social climate was described by surveys completed by teachers and students. Also, students reported on the prevalence of violent and non-violent antisocial behavior. According to the researchers, The multilevel analyses revealed (1) a large difference between the percentage of variance explained within schools (97%), compared with between schools (3%), and (2) teachers' reports of classroom behavior problems explain between-school differences in student-reported antisocial behavior, after controlling for students' family adversity and history of behavior problems during elementary school. Subjects were followed for 10 years, and were assessed using multiple sources of informants. Information about family characteristics was collected from parents; data on classroom behavior problems were collected from elementary school teachers; school social climate data were collected from high school teachers; and adolescent antisocial behavior data were collected from students. The influence of individual and familial factors is compelling and points to the importance of prevention in both preschool and elementary school, with respect to both student behavior problems as well as family adversity. A statistically significant percentage of variation in antisocial behavior between high schools suggests that some aspects of high school climate might indeed be a target for environmental intervention.42

Studying, evaluating, and developing strategies to improve school climate is especially cogent in middle and high schools that are dealing with a considerable number of incidences of problem behaviors. Another study of adolescents in middle schools found a significant correlation between school climate and adolescent behavior. 43 In this study, 2,758 Chinese students in middle schools were asked to complete an anonymous questionnaire about school climate, effortful control (self-control), deviant peer affiliation, and delinquency. The results indicated that school climate is associated with adolescent behavior. The researchers stated, “These findings contribute to understanding the mechanisms through which positive school climate might reduce delinquent behavior and have important implications for prevention efforts aimed at diminishing adolescent delinquency.” Positive school climate and resulting social cohesiveness can reduce the prevalence of delinquent behavior, according to a study by Za-

42

Ibid. Bao, Ki, Zhang, and Wang, “School Climate and Delinquency among Chinese Adolescents,” 573-583. 43

124

Chapter Seven

ykowski and Gunter.44 They analyzed data from 5,037 eleventh grade students in 33 schools. Based on the findings, the researchers found that, “School climate, specifically the social cohesion of schools, reduced serious violent victimization risk.” Social cohesion includes the stability of the school climate that promotes social interaction and relationships between and among students and teachers. Another study considered the mediating effects of violence in the relationship between school climate and negative adolescent behavior.45 With a sample of 586 urban high school students participating in an evaluation of violence prevention programs the findings indicated that the lack of enforcement of school rules, the presence of unsafe places in and around the school, and a negative school climate influenced adolescent drug use directly and indirectly through their effects on violence victimization. According to the researchers, “This research confirms the importance of the school climate as a contributor to violence victimization. Violence victimization is obviously of concern in its own right, but in addition, these data indicated that it also contributes to adolescent drug use.” School administrators should be aware that unsafe places in schools and the failure to enforce school rules as well as an overall negative school climate increase the likelihood of victimization and drug use. Therefore, efforts should be considered to focus on school climate as a strategy of school safety management. In Philadelphia schools, administrators tried to build a culture and climate of safety with school-based management and violence reduction. The results of that effort were the subject of a study that considered three areas: (1) community family and crime composition effects on school disruption and violence; (2) organizational and school social climate data in relation to school safety in 42 middle schools; and (3) factors and impacts in three middle schools.46 According to the researchers, after a 3-year period of study, 44

Heather Zaykowski and Whitney Gunter, “Youth Victimization: School Climate or Deviant Lifestyles?” Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27, no. 3 (2012): 431452. doi:10.1177/0886260511421678. 45 Robert J. Reid, N. Andrew Peterson, Joseph Hughey, and Pauline Garcia-Reid, “School Climate and Adolescent Drug Use: Mediating Effects of Violence Victimization in the Urban High School Context,” The Journal of Primary Prevention, Volume 27 (2006): 281-292. doi:10.1007/s10935-006-0035-y. 46 Wayne N. Welsh, Patricia H. Jenkins, Jack R. Greene, Dawn Caron, Eric Hoffman, Ellen Kurtz, Donna Perone, and Robert Stokes, Building a Culture and Climate of Safety in Public Schools in Philadelphia: School-based Management and

School Climate and Student Discipline and Safety

125

Findings indicated that high levels of disorder at middle schools negatively affected academic achievement and that programs to increase school safety and security are likely to have positive effects on student achievement. In addition, the basic principles of school-based management were helpful for promoting the development of school climate, but school-based management is only one of many strategies for improving school climate and safety. Findings suggested the need to understand school climate and culture as major factors shaping the success or failure of any particular school and to establish mechanisms that provide feedback to those initiating programs of safety planning and school-based management.47

In another study of Philadelphia schools, Welsh found that school climate offers “significant potential for enhancing both the understanding and the prevention of school violence.” 48 Using survey responses from middle school students, researchers considered clarity and fairness of rules and individual student characteristics such as age, gender, race, and dimension of bonding on school disorder, including misconduct, offending, victimization, and safety. It was to be expected that the schools varied significantly on all measures, but the link of explanation was school climate, or as the researcher wrote, “…School climate provided significant explanatory power for each.” That was also the finding in a study that addressed the sensitive and dubious belief that a “bad community” produces “bad children” or “bad schools.”49 The research team studied United States census data, school data, law enforcement data, and school climate survey data from the Effective School Battery Survey that was completed by 7,583 students from 11 middle schools in order to examine predictors of student misconduct, including community poverty and residential stability; community crime; school size; student perceptions of school climate; and individual student characteristics (e.g., age, race, sex, school involvement and effort, belief in rules and positive peer associations). The researchers concluded that the belief that impoverished, high crime communities produce unsafe and unhealthy schools cannot be supported. The locus of control for school success and student behavior was inside the building; nameViolence Reduction, Paper for the National Institute of Justice (Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, 1996), https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Photocopy/171631NCJRS.pdf. 47 Ibid. 48 Welsh, “The Effects of School Climate,” 88-107. 49 Wayne N. Welsh, Jack R. Greene, and Patricia H. Jenkins, “School Disorder: The Influence of Individual, Institutional, and Community Factors,” Criminology, 37, no. 1 (1999): 73-116. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.1999.tb00480.x.

126

Chapter Seven

ly, the schools could control school climate and it was not dictated by the community. Some schools have transcended issues of location and neighborhood to provide a school climate that is perceived as safe. This was the conclusion of a study in Arizona schools where researchers established 22 student focus groups in 11 randomly selected secondary schools.50 Students associated school safety and non-violence and disruptive behavior to the physical features of the school, but a positive school climate and connectedness with the staff increased feelings of safety and security. According to the researchers, Faculty reported that relationships and climate are key factors in making schools safe. High student performance on standardized tests does not buffer students from unsafe behavior, nor does living in a dangerous neighborhood necessarily lead to more drug use or violence within school walls. School climate seemed to explain the difference between schools in which students and faculty reported higher versus lower levels of violence and alcohol and other drug use.51

As in previously referenced research, the locus of control of school climates and the consequences and outcomes, positive or negative, are determined by the adults in the school and less by the community. This was supported further by a study conducted by Georgia State University and the Georgia Department of Education.52 The study considered the relationship between school climate and student achievement. Using student achievement data and school climate survey results from 300,000 student participants, the study examined the impact of factors which a school cannot control (i.e., student population demographics, community poverty level, etc.) on school climate. The researchers found that: It appears that other factors outside of a school's control were not directly related to the development of school climate-other than sub-themes. Factors such as the percentage of students who are free/reduced lunch eligible 50

K. Bosworth, L. Ford, and Diley Hernandez, “School Climate Factors Contributing to Student and Faculty Perceptions of Safety in Select Arizona Schools,” Journal of School Health, 81, no. 4 (2011): 194-201. doi:10.1111/j.17461561.2010.00579.x. 51 Ibid. 52 Garry McGiboney and Dennis Kramer, “The Relationship between School Climate and Student Achievement,” Paper presented at the Youth Issues Summit, Callaway Gardens, March 9, 2012.

School Climate and Student Discipline and Safety

127

or the proportion of students who are traditionally underrepresented did not have a strong relationship with either a positive or negative school climate. Estimates from a linear regression model which examined the predictive nature of factors “outside of a school's control” reinforced the argument that the development of school climate is not directly related to the compositions of the students within a given school.53

The results of the study showed that school administrators and personnel played a prominent role in the development of school climate. Despite the results illustrating that high schools were a challenging environment to develop school climate, there did not appear to be any other significant community or demographic factor that impeded positive school climate development. There is probably little disagreement that a school’s community has multiple levels and types of influence on the school, but research suggests that perhaps the climate of a school is more a function of the administrators, teachers, and other staff members rather than being student or community directed and determined.

Chapter Seven: School Climate and Student Discipline and Safety Summary Points There is a correlation between over-reliance on punitive discipline actions and academic outcomes, increased student absences, social emotional problems, and increases in juvenile detention. Schools need to understand the link between school climate and bullying, as well as other behaviors that jeopardize school safety and student academic outcomes. Schools need to examine what elements within a school’s climate produce situations and conditions where bullying and other forms of student harassment and intimidation are prevalent. Instead of focusing on just the students involved in bullying incidents, a more effective method of prevention and intervention would be an overall, school-wide emphasis on building positive relationships between and among students and staff. School climate holds the key to intervention, not focusing just on the bullying students.

53

Ibid.

128

Chapter Seven

Students who feel their teachers and other school staff are supportive and respond to student concerns are more likely to report bullying and share threats of violence with an adult in the school. Efforts by school staff to provide a supportive climate are a potentially valuable strategy for engaging students in the prevention of bullying and threats of violence. When perceptions of school climate are positive, high self-esteem predicts lower levels of bullying perpetration. Bullies and victims of bullying often feel little or no connection to the school and have little sense of relationship with other students and teachers. The absence of reinforcement of pro-social behavior within a negative school climate seems to foster bullying victimization and allows bullying without impunity. Bullying is a manifestation of an unhealthy school climate and prevention and intervention programs are less likely to be effective if implemented in a school with a negative school climate. Discipline practices should not be polarized into a “get tough” versus “give support” debate because both structure and support contribute to school safety for adolescents. Legal and punitive measures for bullies alone have not solved the problem. Implementing a program for a targeted problem, such as bullying, in a negative school climate will most likely not be effective and if it is effective, it will not be sustainable. Teachers and staff are able to predict student aggression and their willingness to intervene to stop student aggression is based on their perception of school climate. Teachers and staff in positive school environments are more likely to intervene and prevent bullying than teachers and staff working in negative school environments. Teachers in schools with high rates of bullying report weaker leadership, low teacher affiliation, and little collaborative activity than teachers in schools with low rates of bullying. Schools that are perceived by students as safe have lower levels of teen dating violence. Like people, schools have their own characteristic personalities, or climates.

School Climate and Student Discipline and Safety

129

School climate offers significant potential for enhancing both the understanding and the prevention of school violence and consequently make schools safer and more secure. The failure to inform staff members of possible dangerous situations at school may be a sign of a lack of trust, which is byproduct of a school climate that does not promote engagement, connectedness, and relationships. Students who report positive school climate elements such as school engagement and positive relationships are more likely to inform staff members of weapons and other potential threats to school safety. Students who perceive their school climate as positive are more likely to take ownership and feel like school safety is part of their responsibility. Students with positive perceptions of their schools are more likely to say they would do something rather than ignore their peer's dangerous intentions. Positive school climate and resulting social cohesiveness can reduce the prevalence of delinquent behavior. School administrators should be aware that unsafe places in schools and the failure to enforce school rules as well as an overall negative school climate escalate the likelihood of victimization and drug use. Programs to increase school safety and security are likely to have positive effects on student achievement. The need to understand school climate and culture as major factors shaping the success or failure of schools and to establish mechanisms that provide feedback to those initiating programs of safety planning and school-based management should not be ignored. The belief that impoverished, high crime communities always produce unsafe and unhealthy schools cannot be supported. Students associate school safety and non-violence and disruptive behavior with the physical features of the school, but a positive school climate and connectedness with the staff increase feelings of safety and security and attitudes of responsibility toward one another. The determinants of school climate are the administrators, teachers, and other staff members more than student and the conditions of the community.

CHAPTER EIGHT SCHOOL CLIMATE AND POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

“Implementation of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports has positive outcomes at the school-wide level, but it also allows staff to focus more time on individual students with specific needs.” —Eber, Lewis-Palmer, and Pacchiano1

Efforts to change student behavior extend back to the 19th century with discussions about corporal punishment. Those discussions took on a more serious tone and meaning when by 1910 attendance at public school was mandatory. At that time and for much of the first half of the 20th century, common wisdom held that student discipline centered on doing whatever was necessary to control the behavior of students so that the transfer of knowledge from the teacher to the student could take place. Teachers and administrators were expected to control and dictate student behavior. Over time a gradual shift took place that contemplated the possibility that student misbehavior was more complicated than originally thought. There were changes in school law dictated by court decisions that spoke of student rights, specifically due process based on the concept that a free and appropriate education is a property right.2 Additionally, extreme cases of school violence seemed to march one right after another, leading to what some viewed as an overreaction by school districts in the form of “zero tolerance” (defined as an automatic punishment for violations of rules without regard to nature, circumstances, or conditions). Zero tolerance was imposed as a concept to harden school leader’s position that nothing is 1

Lucille Eber, Teri Lewis-Palmer, and Debra Pacchiano, “School-wide Positive Behavior Systems: Improving School Environments for All Students Including Those with EBD,” Paper presented at the System of Care for Children’s Mental Health Conference, Tampa, February 2002, https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/ERICED465253/pdf/ERIC-ED465253.pdf. 2 Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 1975.

School Climate and Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

131

more important than the safety of schools. The intention was to focus even more on safety than ever before. At the time of its origins the idea of zero tolerance had broad public appeal and widespread support from the education community. The problems of implementation began to emerge soon after hundreds of school districts across the nation adopted zero tolerance as a policy. The issues related to zero tolerance became national news on a regular basis with many individual extreme cases of unreasonable intolerance of rules; for example, the suspension of a student for wearing a Tweety Bird chain that was obviously a child’s accessory, but the chain was a violation of the school’s gang section prohibiting chains of any type. Additionally, there is evidence that zero tolerance policies are not effective in making schools safer.3 At the time zero tolerance started to become the policy in many school districts, the role of School Resources Officer (SRO) changed in response to violent incidences in schools. The combination of the expanded rule of SROs to include student discipline management and not just safety, plus the policy shift to zero tolerance, resulted in SRO arrests of students increasing significantly and the number of students expelled or suspended from school also increased. After more than a decade of zero tolerance policies and increases in out-of-school suspensions, expulsions, and juvenile arrests, many child advocates stepped forward to say that too many students were being arrested for non-violent, non-weapon, and non-drug behaviors. However, discussions about student misbehavior too often are overly simplistic: either schools are too disciplined and suspend too many students or schools are not disciplined enough and don’t suspend enough students. Regardless, the management of student behavior continues to be a significant concern of educators across the world for a number of reasons, such as safety, security, academic outcomes, etc.4 Equally important is the role student be3

Russell J. Skiba and Kimberly Knesting “Zero Tolerance, Zero Evidence: An Analysis of School Disciplinary Practice,” New Directions for Youth Development 2001, no. 92 (2001): 17-43, doi:10.1002/yd.23320019204; American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force, “Are Zero Tolerance Policies Effective in Schools?” American Psychologist, 63, no. 9 (2008): 852-862, doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.9.852; American Bar Association, Zero Tolerance Policy Report, 2001, http://www.americanbar.org/groups/child_law/tools_to_use/attorneys/school_disci plinezerotolerancepolicies.html. 4 Glen Dunlap, Rose Iovannone, Kelly J. Wilson, Donald K. Kincaid, and Phillip Strain, “Prevent-Teach-Reinforce: A Standardized Model of School-Based Behav-

132

Chapter Eight

havior plays in teacher job satisfaction and retention. According to McKinney, Campbell-Whatley, and Kea, over 50 percent of urban teachers leave teaching within the first 5 years of their career due to student behavior problems and classroom management challenges.5 At the same time, parents report that their main concern is their child’s safety at school.6 These issues and varying opinions leave school leaders in a difficult management and policy position. A number of student management products, strategies, programs, and projects have emerged over the last several years aimed at improving student behavior. This has become a profitable business for publishing companies and consultants. Yet, few of the products or services are effective much beyond the implementation year and only a handful are researchbased and research-supported. Consequently, many school administrators and teachers are left to implement their own student behavior procedures and practices that may or may not be effective over time. A research-based and Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Agency (SAMHSA)-approved student management system that aims to improve school climate is Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS). PBIS is an evidence-based, data-driven framework that focuses on the application of a multi-tiered (Tier I = universal screening of all students; Tier II = targeted groups for intervention; Tier III = individual student needs) approach to prevention, using disciplinary data and principles of behavior analysis to create school-wide, targeted and individualized interventions and supports to improve school climate for all students instead of just targeted interventions for a small segment of students. Instead of relying on an assortment of short-term projects for individual students that may or may not be effective, PBIS schools focus on proactive ways to define, teach, and sustain appropriate student behaviors in all school settings, including the classroom, hallways, cafeteria, school bus, playgrounds, and restrooms. The PBIS framework provides a means for schools to design effective environments that will stabilize the school cliioral Intervention,” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12 (2010): 9-22. doi:10.1177/1098300708330880. 5 Sueanne E. McKinney, Gloria D. Campbell-Whately, and Cathy D. Kea, “Managing Student Behavior in Urban Classrooms: The Role of Teacher ABC Assessments,” The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues, and Ideas, 79, no. 1 (2005): 16–20. doi:10.3200/TCHS.79.1.16-20. 6 Shelley Neilsen-Gatti and Lynn Stansberry-Brusnahan, R. Nelson, and C. Ryan, “Strategies for Increasing Parental Involvement in School-Wide Positive Behavioral Support Initiatives,” 2007.

School Climate and Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

133

mate and thereby increase teaching and learning and improving student outcomes.7 According to Education Week’s Quality Counts report, Code of Conduct (2013), Schools have adopted a variety of approaches to improve school climate in an effort to reduce student discipline problems. A growing number of schools that recognize the need to improve school climate are using school-wide behavioral-management strategies such as PBIS.8

PBIS evolved from three main sources: applied behavior analysis; normalization and inclusion practices; and a person-centered focus on prevention and intervention with a population-based framework. It focuses on reducing school climate elements that trigger disruptive behavior and creates significant change in how schools handle student discipline, how staff members handle student discipline and how staff members respond to and interact with students. PBIS is endorsed by several national associations and organizations, including the National Association of School Psychologists, the American Association of School Administrators, the American School Counselors Association, as well as the United States Department of Education and others. In state studies of PBIS implementation conducted in Maryland, North Carolina, Iowa, and New Hampshire, it was found that when PBIS was implemented with fidelity the impact on school climate and subsequent outcomes for students was significant. At the time of the Maryland study, elementary schools using PBIS reduced ODRs by 43 percent, while the reductions for middle schools were 33 percent and 37 percent respectively. Each school level reported lower out-of-school suspensions.9 Iowa examined data from 24 schools that implemented PBIS and found that ODRs decreased on an average of 42 percent over a 2-year period.10 At the time 7

Catherine P. Bradshaw, Mary M. Mitchell, and Philip J. Leaf, “Examining the Effects of School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on Student Outcomes,” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, no. 3 (2010): 133-148. doi:10.1177/1098300709334798. 8 Education Week, “Quality Counts: Code of Conduct,” January 10, 2013. 9 Susan B. Barrett, Catherine P. Bradshaw, Teri Lewis-Palmer, “Maryland Statewide PBIS Initiative: Systems, Evaluation, and Next Steps,” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10 (2008): 105-114. doi:10.1177/1098300707312541. 10 Robin L. Mass-Galloway, Marion V. Panyan, Carl R. Smith, and Suana Wessendorf, “Systems Change with School-Wide Positive Behavior Supports: Iowa’s Work in Progress,” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10, no. 2 (2008): 129-135. doi:10.1177/1098300707312545.

134

Chapter Eight

of a study of North Carolina’s PBIS schools, there were 737 schools. The study compared North Carolina’s ODR averages with the national ODR averages.11 The results showed that North Carolina PBIS schools had an average ODR rate out of 100 students of .29 compared to the national average of .34 in K-6 school; in sixth through ninth grade schools it was .84 ODRs compared to the national average of .92, and at high schools the North Carolina ODR rate of .62 was considerably lower than the national average of 1.00 ODRs. New Hampshire’s 28 PBIS schools also saw a reduction in ODRs.12 In a longitudinal study that covered 5 years, researchers looked at how PBIS might alter school climate.13 The researchers examined school staff perception of school climate after the implementation of PBIS. The survey data sample came from school staff members in 37 elementary schools. This included over 2,000 staff members. The researchers stated that Longitudinal multilevel analyses on data from 2,596 staff revealed a significant effect of PBIS on the schools’ overall organizational health, resource influence, staff affiliation, and academic emphasis over the 5-year trial; the effects on collegial leadership and institutional integrity were significant when implementation fidelity was included in the model.

Ross, Romer, and Horner analyzed the relationship between outcomes of teacher well-being, including burnout and efficacy, and the implementation of PBIS.14 In the study 184 teachers from 40 elementary schools participated. According to the researchers, “Results indicated that teachers in schools implementing PBIS with fidelity had significantly lower levels of burnout and significantly higher levels of efficacy. Based on the analysis 11

Heather Reynolds, Diann Irwin, and Bob Algozzine, North Carolina Positive Behavior Initiative Evaluation Report 2007-2008. (Charlotte, Department of Public Instruction, Exceptional Children Division, Behavioral Support Services, 2009), https://www.pbis.org/common/cms/files/pbisresources/ncevaluationreport07_08.pdf. 12 Howard S. Muscott, Eric L. Mann, and Marcel R. LeBrun, “Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports in New Hampshire: Effects of Large-Scale Implementation of School-Wide Positive Behavior Support on Student Discipline and Academic Achievement,” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10, no. 3 (2008): 190-205. doi:10.1177/1098300708316258. 13 Catherine P. Bradshaw, Christine W. Koth, Leslie A. Thornton, and Philip J. Leaf, “Altering School Climate through School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: Findings from a Group-Randomized Effectiveness Trial,” Prevention Science, 10, no. 2 (2009): 100-115. doi:10.1007/s11121-008-0114-9. 14 Ross, Romer, and Horner, “Teacher Well-Being,” 118-128.

School Climate and Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

135

teachers who benefitted the most were those in schools of low socioeconomic status.”15 The PBIS frameworks can improve school climate to benefit students and for the well-being of teachers. Another interesting finding of the research concerned the rate of implementation of PBIS. The researchers found that schools trained in PBIS that quickly adopted and implemented the PBIS frameworks had increased levels of organizational health, but schools that trained and implemented PBIS more deliberately “tended to experience the greatest improvements in organizational health after implementing PBIS.” This study indicated that changes in school organizational health are important consequences of the PBIS whole-school prevention model, but like almost all significant change, it takes time and commitment to embrace the concepts and practices of PBIS in order to fully benefit from it. PBIS has been linked to student academic outcomes as well as reductions in student misbehavior. A 3-year study of the PBIS effect in an urban setting found that office discipline referrals and out-of-school suspensions in an urban, inner-city middle school decreased significantly over the course of the study.16 Additionally, a regression analysis showed a significant relationship between the reduction of student misbehavior after implementation of PBIS and increased student academic performance. The correlation between student behavior and student achievement was also the finding of a study that included a large sample of teachers (300) and students (10,000) in middle schools. 17 Some schools implemented PBIS frameworks for improving school climate over a 4-year period of time (four school years) while other schools that did not implement PBIS served as the control group. The implementation of PBIS included full fidelity with data analysis, teaching of social skills, praise strategies, posting of school rules, proactive screening of students at risk of emotional and behavioral issues, and a pyramid of targeted interventions. According to the researchers, PBIS schools showed statistically significant improvements in teacher ratings of school climate and student performance, while the control school 15

Ibid. Lassen, Steele, and Sailor, “The Relationship of Schoolwide Positive Behavior,” 701-712. 17 Paul Calderella, Ryan H. Shatzer, Kristy M. Gray, K. Richard Young, and Ellie L. Young, “The Effects of School-Wide Positive Behavior Support on Middle School Climate and Student Outcomes,” Research in Middle Level Education, 35, no. 4 (2011): 1-14, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ959830.pdf. 16

136

Chapter Eight tended to stay the same or worsen. Statistically significant decreases were also evident in students' tardiness, unexcused absences, and office discipline referrals when compared to the control schools.18

A Canadian study of an elementary school implementing PBIS with fidelity also found a significant positive relationship between PBIS and student academic and behavioral outcomes.19 Additionally, the study results showed a significantly positive increase in staff and student perceptions of safety, understanding of school expectations, and decreased incidents of bullying. Muscott, Mann, and LeBrun looked at the effects of a large-scale implementation of PBIS on student discipline and academic achievement.20 New Hampshire implemented PBIS in K-12 schools. The researchers found that it took a school approximately two years to reach a level of implementation fidelity resulting in effective implementation of PBIS concepts and practices with measurable outcomes. The effective implementation of PBIS had a positive long-term effect on student discipline and academic achievement. The implementation of PBIS reduced office discipline referrals by 6,010 and out-of-school suspensions by 1,032, with middle schools and high schools experiencing the most benefit. According to the study, “These reductions helped the schools recover 864 days of teaching, 1,701 days of learning, and 571 days of leadership. Implementation of PBIS was associated with significant academic gains, especially in math.”21 A study by Bradshaw, Waasdorp, and Leaf of 12,344 elementary students (52.9% male; 45.1% African-American and 46.1% White; 49% received free or reduced-price meals; and 12.9% received special education services) in 37 elementary schools looked at the effects of PBIS on behavior problems, social emotional skill, concentration, and prosocial behavior using the Teacher Observation of Classroom Adaption Checklist. 22 The 18

Ibid. Joanna L. Kelm, Kent McIntosh, and Sharon Cooley, “Effects of Implementing School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on Problem Behavior and Academic Achievement in a Canadian Elementary School,” Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 29 (2014): 155-160. doi:10.1177/0829573514540266. 20 Muscott, Mann, and LeBrun, “Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports in New Hampshire,” 190-205. 21 Ibid. 22 Catherine P. Bradshaw, Tracy E. Waasdorp, and Philip J. Leaf, “Examining Variation in the Impact of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and 19

School Climate and Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

137

results of the study found a correlation between PBIS and the reduction of behavior problems and corresponding reductions in in-school and out-ofschool suspensions. What is especially important about this study is the finding that the positive effects of improving school climate by implementing PBIS had the greatest and most significant impact on at-risk and high-risk students, especially those previously in negative learning climates. Most of the studies focusing on PBIS refer to the importance of the implementation of fidelity and sustainability, so it is essential to consider the most important components of implementation.23 In a national study of 257 PBIS school teams’ members, researchers used the School-Wide Universal Behavior Sustainability Index: School Teams Survey (a researchvalidated measure of variables related to behavior interventions) to identify those elements that are fundamental to successful implementation of PBIS with fidelity.24 According to the researchers, Across quantitative and qualitative analyses, results indicated that administrator support and school team functioning were rated as the most important features for both the initial implementation and sustainability of PBIS, whereas barriers to PBIS were rated as relatively less important. Staff support, integration into typical practice, and parent involvement were rated as significantly more important to sustainability than the initial implementation. These results were consistent across types of raters and schools.25

Supports: Findings from a Randomized Controlled Effectiveness Trial,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, no 2 (2015): 546-557, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037630; Bradshaw, Koth, Thornton, and Leaf, “Altering School Climate,” 100-115. 23 Kent McIntosh, Larissa K. Predy, Gita Upreti, Amanda E. Hume, Mary G. Turri, and Susanna Mathews, “Perceptions of Contextual Features Related to Implementation and Sustainability of School-wide Positive Behavior Support,” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 16 (2013): 29-41. doi:10.1177/1098300712470723. 24 Kent McIntosh, Larissa K. Predy, Gita Upreti, Amanda E. Hume, Mary G. Turri, and Susanna Mathews, “Perceptions of Contextual Features Related to Implementation and Sustainability of School-Wide Positive Behavior Support,” Journal of Positive Behavior, Volume 16, No. 1 (2014): 31-43, http://dx.doi.10.1177/109830071240723. 25 Ibid.

138

Chapter Eight

Schools that are most likely to successfully implement PBIS with fidelity are those that have interested and connected leadership at the school level, with support from the central office, and those with a strong, dedicated PBIS school team that engage all staff members in the implementation of PBIS and who communicate effectively with parents. Much of the research on PBIS shows that it can be effective if implemented with fidelity, but that is one of the keys–fidelity. Implementing PBIS with fidelity is very difficult and requires dedication, patience, and a commitment of the leadership of the school district and school, and certainly the support of teachers. The importance of fidelity was examined from the data of 27,689 students in 166 primary and secondary schools in seven states, which included school and student demographic data, indices of PBIS implementation, and student discipline reports. 26 The results showed that many schools failed to implement PBIS properly, but when they did there was a significant decrease in student discipline referrals. Nevertheless, the main point of the findings was that there is considerable variance in how effectively PBIS is implemented, which is a clear message to schools and school districts that the introduction, training, implementation, and evaluation of implementation should be carefully planned, expertly staffed, and assessed by evaluation experts for the purpose of determining the degree of fidelity. It should also be noted that there are serious ramifications from the faulty implementation of PBIS. The possibility of improving school climate may be lost because of the negative opinion that could arise from an unsuccessful PBIS effort. Future efforts to address school climate may be met with a negative attitude. There are no assurances that PBIS will be a success, but there should be a dedicated commitment to the full and effective implementation of PBIS, because anything short of that could be detrimental to students and teachers. The implementation of PBIS has positive outcomes at the school-wide level, but it also allows staff to focus more time on individual students with specific needs. This was also the finding of a study of 14 schools representing a cross-section of PBIS-involved schools. 27 The researchers found that Data indicated schools were successful in utilizing program data to guide interventions that improved student behavior. Results include reduced 26

Molloy, Moore, Trail, Van Epps, and Hopfer, “Understanding Real-World Implementation Quality,” 593-605. 27 Eber, Lewis-Palmer, and Pacchiano, “Schoolwide Positive Behavior Systems,” February 2002.

School Climate and Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

139

numbers of in-office discipline referrals, in-school suspensions, and out-ofschool suspensions. Results also suggest that a focus on improving behavior at the universal level can lead school teams to begin establishing systems for effective interventions for students with more intensive and chronic problems. For example, schools reported that when they experience overall reductions in total discipline incidents (i.e., detentions, office discipline referrals, and suspensions), teachers and administrators are more capable to explore individual interventions for a lesser number of students.28

Creating a school climate that improved the identification of the needs of students was one of the original purposes of PBIS; the program was intended to reduce the number of special education students removed from the classroom due to misbehavior. A study by Tobin, Horner, Vincent, and Swain-Bradway was based on a question: “If schools are able to reduce discipline referral rates for major offenses for the school as a whole, will the number of students in special education classes who receive discipline referrals be reduced?”29 The study analyzed PBIS ODR data records based on the Schoolwide Information System (SWIS) from schools across the nation. The sample size was 85 schools. The researchers found The results of this study indicated that in PBIS schools that are using SWIS there was a reduction in their rates of major ODRs, the number of students in special education who receive ODRs, as well as the total number of all students involved in disciplinary incidents reduced over time. This is important because students in special education generally tend to be over30 represented in disciplinary incidents.

The study’s answer to the research question was “Yes.” Implementing PBIS with fidelity reduced ODRs and reduced the amount of lost instructional time for all students, including special education students, and improved school climate for all students. In a study that examined the perception of the effectiveness of PBIS from teachers in middle schools, it was found that teachers thought PBIS 28

Ibid. Tary Tobin, Rob Horner, Claudia Vincent, and Jessica Swain-Bradway, “If Discipline Referral Rates for the School as a Whole Are Reduced, Will Rates for Students with Disabilities Also Be Reduced?” (Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, OSEP Technical Assistance Center, 2014) http://www.pbis.org/common/cms/files/pbisresources/Evalu_Brief_revised_IEP_O DR_Nov25.pdf. 30 Ibid. 29

140

Chapter Eight

was effective in reducing discipline problems and other negative behaviors such as bullying.31 According to the researcher, “There is a statistically significant relationship between a teacher’s perceptions of the fidelity of the implementation of SWPBIS and their perceptions of the effect it has towards reducing students’ negative behaviors.” Teachers stated further that implementing PBIS with continuous staff training is crucial to its effectiveness. With teacher turnover and the ever-changing challenges schools face, staff training and refresher training was necessary for sustaining the progress made while implementing PBIS to improve school climate. Another study examined the impact of PBIS on school climate health using data from a large randomized controlled trial of PBIS. 32 The research included 37 elementary schools and 2,507 staff members. According to the researchers, The longitudinal multilevel analyses revealed a significant effect of PBIS on staff reports of the schools' overall organizational health, resource influence, and staff affiliation over a 3-year period. This study indicated that changes in school organizational health are important consequences of the PBIS whole-school prevention model, and might in turn be a potential mediator of the effect of PBIS on student performance.33

The study suggested that PBIS as a framework for improving school climate should be considered as a possible management-support model for strategic planning purposes. Skiba and Williams found that “While PBIS reduces school exclusion for all students we found that students of color in PBIS schools were still more likely to receive harsher punishments for similar misbehavior than their white peers.” 34 However, another study found that in schools that implemented PBIS with fidelity there was a significant reduction in major student discipline referral rates and the reductions were across each racial31

Kristine M. Harper, “Teacher Perceptions of the Use of School-Wide Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports at Reducing the Presence of Bullying in Middle Schools” (dissertation, The University of Southern Mississippi, 2015), http://aquila.usm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1121&context=dissertations. 32 Bradshaw, Koth, Bevans, Ialongo, and Leaf, “The Impact of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions,” 462-473. 33 Ibid. 34 Russ Skiba and Gerald Williams, “Framing the Challenge: Research on Disciplinary Disproportionality and the Need for Equity-Explicit Intervention,” Paper at the PBIS National Leadership Forum, Rosemount, October 2013.

School Climate and Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

141

ethnic category.35 The researchers used a sample that included 69 elementary schools in 16 states during three consecutive academic years. They controlled for race and ethnicity when reviewing ODRs. The findings revealed that, Overall, results indicated that elementary schools that documented a reduction in their overall major ODR rates also showed reductions in numbers of major ODR for each racial-ethnic category of interest as well as reductions in the number of students receiving major ODR. The pattern of reductions from year to year appears to hold across most races and ethnicities.36

The results were encouraging, but a closer look at the raw data still shows that the actual numbers of ODRs for minority students was higher. The numbers declined at the same rate as non-minority students, but the gap did not close. Still, experts in school climate and PBIS such as Simonsen and Sugai are encouraged that PBIS implementation can reduce the ODRs for all groups of students, because there are few strategies that have been successful across race and ethnicity.37 Positive learning climates using frameworks such as PBIS have the potential to make a significant impact on academic outcomes and social emotional development in different educational settings. It is worthy to note how PBIS is being implemented in alternative education and juvenile detention centers. Simonsen and Sugai stated that, “The PBIS framework provides the systems and tools for establishing a continuum of evidence-based practices, regardless of whether the setting is a general or special education classroom…or a lock-down correctional facility, or an alternative program for youth with particular academic and/or behavior support needs.”38

35

Claudia G. Vincent and Tary J. Tobin, “An Examination of the Relationship between Implementation of Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support and Exclusion of Students from Various Ethnic Backgrounds with and without Disabilities,” Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 19, no. 4 (2011): 217-232. doi:10.1177/1063426610377329. 36 Ibid. 37 Brandi Simonsen and George Sugai, “PBIS in Restrictive Educational Settings: Positive Support for Youth with High-Risk Behavior,” Education and Treatment of Children, Special Issue: PBIS as Prevention for High-Risk Youth in Alternative Education, Residential, and Juvenile Justice Settings, 36, no. 3(2013): 3-14. doi:10.1353/etc.2013.0030. 38 Ibid.

142

Chapter Eight

A report from the National Evaluation and Technical Assistance Center for Children and Youth identified several states with successful PBIS implementation in juvenile justice facilities that provided educational settings.39 In a 2013 study that included a review of records and interviews, it was found that the teachers and staff members of the juvenile justice facilities and residential facilities supported the use of PBIS instead of the more common focus on punishment; however, the study identified challenges to implementation such as the need for continuous staff training, the tendency to revert back to punishment, and the individual characteristics of the youth that required more direct interventions in Tier II and Tier III.40 In other words, facilities should be organized in such a way to support a multi-tiered system of support which PBIS can provide. The need for a seamless continuum from Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III was supported in a study by Scott and Cooper, “For those students whose behaviors were not responsive to Tiers I and II support, Tier III support systems must be established and working in a consistent manner…the systemic structure of the PBIS Tiered framework provides mechanisms to facilitate consistent use of effective practice no matter the Tiers of support needed.”41 Several juvenile justice facilities in Texas have implemented PBIS. Jolivette, Swoszowski, and Ennis examined the use of PBIS in these facilities and reported, “…Evidence of reductions in behavioral incident reports, improvements in school attendance, and increases in career and technical industry certifications. We argue that these improvements could only be due to PBIS implementation and not alternative explanations.”42

39

Nicholas Read and Stephanie Lampron, “Supporting Student Achievement through Sound Behavior Management Practices in Schools and Juvenile Justice Facilities: A Spotlight on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS)” (Washington, D.C., The National Evaluation and Technical Assistance Center, 2012), http://www.neglected-delinquent.org/sites/default/files/docs/SupportingStudent Achievement.pdf. 40 Jessica Swain-Bradway, Nicole C. Swoszowski, Lauren J. Boden, and Jeffrey R. Sprague, “Voices from the Field: Stakeholders Perspective on PBIS Implementation in Alternative Educational Settings,” Education and Treatment of Children, 36, no. 3 (2013): 31-46. doi:10.1353/etc.2013.0020. 41 Terrance M. Scott and Justin Cooper, “ Tertiary-Tier PBIS in Alternative, Residential and Correctional School Settings: Considering Intensity of the Delivery of Evidence-Based Practice,” Education and Treatment of Children, 36, no. 3 (2013):101-120. doi:10.1353/etc.2013.0029. 42 Kristine Jolivette, Nicole C. Swoszowski, and Robin P. Ennis, “PBIS as Prevention for High-Risk Youth in Alternative Education, Residential, and Juvenile Jus-

School Climate and Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

143

These findings were replicated in another study of a Texas juvenile justice facility.43 The researchers reported a 46 percent reduction in total disruptive incidents; a 41 percent reduction in incidents without a security referral; a 56 percent reduction in incidents with a security referral; a 21 percent increase in average daily school attendance, and an increase of 131 industry certifications. According to the researchers, previous research on the effectiveness of PBIS in alternative settings such as juvenile justice centers has focused on behavior and security outcomes, but their study showed that academic outcomes can improve, also. In an article by Lampron and Gonsoulin (2013), they discussed the implementation of PBIS as an effective framework in alternative education, residential facilities, and in juvenile justice facilities for a number of reasons.44 However, Lampron and Gonsoulin extend the reach of prevention and intervention effects of PBIS because, “…the benefits of PBIS for juvenile justice-involved youth lay not only in its further expansion within restrictive settings, but in the powerful support it could provide for transition if it were implemented across juvenile justice and community schools district- or community-wide.”45 Every facility, home, business, and school has a climate, and within each of those climates is a negative or positive impact or influence. Sometimes that impact or influence strongly affects its occupants and sometimes the impact is more subtle and insidious, but over time even the subtle becomes significant with the accumulative impact. PBIS is not a panacea, as most of the researchers will concede, but it has proven to be an effective framework for improving climate in schools and in alternative education facilities.

tice Settings,” Education and Treatment of Children, 36, no. 3, (2013): 1-2. doi:10.1353/etc.2013.0027. 43 Leah E. Johnson, Eugene W. Wang, Zhaomin He, Clint Carpenter, C. Michael Nelson, and Brenda K. Scheuermann, “Youth Outcomes Following Implementation of Universal SWPBIS in a Texas Secure Juvenile Facility,” Education and Treatment of Children, 36, no. 3 (2013): 135-145. 44 Stephanie Lampron and Simon Gonsoulin, “PBIS in Restrictive Settings: The Time is Now,” Education and Treatment of Children, 36, no. 3 (2013): 161-174. doi:10.1353/etc.2013.0023. 45 Ibid.

144

Chapter Eight

Chapter Eight: School Climate and Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports Summary Points Zero tolerance was imposed as a concept to harden school leaders’ position that nothing is more important than the safety of schools. The role of SRO changed as part of the shift to zero tolerance. SRO arrests of students increased significantly, many times due to zero tolerance policies. Due to zero tolerance policies, many students were arrested for nonviolent, non-weapon, and non-drug behaviors. Over 50 percent of urban teachers leave teaching within the first five years of their career due to student behavior problems and classroom management challenges. Parents report that their main concern is their child’s safety at school. Many school administrators and teachers are left to implement their own student behavior procedures and practices that may or may not be effective over time unless they have access to a research-based intervention or prevention strategy. A research-based and SAMHSA approved student management system that aims to improve school climate is PBIS. PBIS is an evidence-based, data-driven framework that focuses on the application of a multi-tiered approach to prevention, using disciplinary data and principles of behavior analysis to create school-wide supports to improve school climate for all students. The PBIS framework provides a means for schools to design effective environments that will stabilize the school climate. A growing number of schools that recognize the need to improve the school climate are using school-wide behavioral-management strategies such as PBIS. Teachers in schools implementing PBIS with fidelity have significantly lower levels of burnout and significantly higher levels of efficacy. Schools trained in PBIS that quickly adopt and implement the PBIS frameworks have increased levels of organizational health, but schools that train and implement more deliberately experience the greatest improvements in organizational health after implementing PBIS. PBIS is linked to student academic outcomes as well as reductions in student misbehavior. It takes some schools approximately two years to reach a level of implementation fidelity resulting in effective implementation of PBIS concepts and practices with measurable outcomes.

School Climate and Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

145

In some studies, the positive effects of improving school climate by implementing PBIS have the greatest and most significant impact on at-risk and high-risk students. Administrator support and school team functioning are rated as the most important features for both the initial implementation and sustainability of PBIS. Staff support, integration into typical practice, and parent involvement are significantly more important to the sustainability of PBIS successes than the initial implementation. Schools that are most likely to successfully implement PBIS are those that have interested and connected leadership at the school, with support from the central office, and those with a strong, dedicated PBIS school team that engage all staff members in the implementation of PBIS and who communicate effectively with parents. In PBIS schools that are using School-wide Information System, there was a reduction in their rates of ODRs, the number of students in special education who receive ODRs, as well as the total number of all students involved in disciplinary incidents. This is important because students in special education generally tend to be over-represented in disciplinary incidents. Teachers state that implementing PBIS with continuous staff training is crucial to its effectiveness. Studies suggest that PBIS as a framework for improving school climate should be considered as a possible management-support model for strategic planning purposes. There is considerable variance in how effectively PBIS is implemented, which is a clear message to schools and school districts that the introduction, training, implementation, and evaluation of implementation should be carefully planned, expertly staffed, and assessed by evaluation experts for the purpose of determining the degree of fidelity. Schools that implement PBIS with fidelity see a significant reduction in major student discipline referral rates and the reductions are across each racial-ethnic category. The PBIS framework provides the systems and tools for establishing a continuum of evidence-based practices, regardless of whether the setting is a general or special education classroom, a lock-down correctional facility, or an alternative program for youth with particular academic and/or behavior support needs. The alternative education facilities such as alternative schools and juvenile justice centers should be organized in such a way to support a multi-tiered system of support which PBIS can provide.

146

Chapter Eight

Evidence in alternative schools and juvenile justice centers shows reductions in behavioral incident reports, improvements in school attendance, increases in academic achievement, and increases in career and technical industry certifications. The benefits of PBIS for juvenile justice-involved youth lay not only in its further expansion within restrictive settings, but in the powerful support it could provide for transition if it were implemented across juvenile justice and community schools district- or community-wide.

CHAPTER NINE SCHOOL CLIMATE AND PHYSICAL HEALTH AND ACTIVITY LEVEL OF STUDENTS

“The stability of a school’s climate may influence not only attitudes, but also the amount of physical activity and the level of stress that impact students.” —Gilstad-Hayden et al1

An often unnoticed and underreported component of influence regarding school climate is the relationship between school climate and the physical health of students. At first glance it may seem like an unlikely relationship, but research shows that learning can be determined to some extent by the attitude of students about their own health and habits. Allport defined attitude as the mental and neural state of readiness that is organized through personal experience. 2 This exerts influence on students’ response to attempts to close the gap between the need to learn and the acquisition of knowledge. Students acquire experience and knowledge about physical health at school, and it is one of the most direct educational experiences tied to practical use. The formation of attitude determines the use of knowledge and the influence of school climate on attitude about health can be formidable. A growing body of research shows a connection between school climate and the physical health of students and their attitudes about physical health. Some studies have found that school climate and the effectiveness of teaching influence current and future health and health behaviors of students.

1

Kathryn Gilstad-Hayden, Amy Carroll-Scott, Lisa Rosenthal, Susan M. Peters, Catherine McCaslin, and Jeannette R. Ickovics, “Positive School Climate is Associated with Lower Body Mass Index Percentile among Urban Preadolescents,” Journal of School Health, 84, no. 8 (2014): 502-506. doi:10.1111/josh.12177. 2 Gordon W. Allport, “The Historical Background of Modern Social Psychology” in G. Lindzey (Ed.), Handbook of Social Psychology, (Cambridge, MA: AddisonWesley, 1954): 3-56.

148

Chapter Nine

A study by Samdal, Nutbeam, Wold, and Kannas examined students’ satisfaction with school climate and how it related to their school experiences.3 Based on data from the Health Behavior in School-aged Children Survey with 11-, 13-, and 15-year-old students in Finland, Latvia, Norway, and Slovakia, the findings suggested that in school health promotion interventions, such as programs aimed at getting students to exercise more and consume healthier food and adopt healthy lifestyles, considerable attention should be given to school climate, including the importance of the studentteacher relationship. The school climate and the student-teacher relationship as a component of school climate were central determinants of student attitudes about health education and making healthy choices. School climate was cited as an important component of the successful implementation of the Child and Adolescent Trial for Cardiovascular Health (CATCH).4 The CATCH study provided an opportunity to study how aspects of school climate are associated with continued implementation of the CATCH program. The researchers used an analysis of nutrients on school menus, observations of physical education classes, teacher and staff self-reports, and students’ perceptions of school climate to measure the implementation of CATCH program components. The results of the study indicated that school climate elements were associated with the successful implementation of the CATCH program. The findings showed that the health of a school’s climate may have implications for the effectiveness of school health promotion programs from the initial trial stage to institutionalization. The authors wrote, “Measures of school climate may be useful in determining a school's readiness to adopt and implement an innovative health promotion curriculum.”5 Implementing programs to improve the physical health of students may be compromised in schools with a negative school climate, which could shape student attitudes about health information. A 2009 study by Modin and Ostberg examined the importance of attitudes toward school climate for adolescents’ psychosomatic health using 3

Oddrun Samdal, D. Nutbeam, Bente Wold, and L. Kannas, “Achieving Health and Educational Goals through Schools: A Study of the Importance of the School Climate and the Students’ Satisfaction with School,” Health Education Research, 13, no. 3 (1998): 383-397. doi:10.1093/her/13.3.383. 4 Guy S. Parcel, Cheryl L. Perry, Steven H. Kelder, John P. Elder, Paul D. Mitchell, Leslie A. Lytle, Carolyn C. Johnson, and Elaine J. Stone, “School Climate and the Institutionalization of the CATCH Program,” Health Education and Behavior, 30, no. 4 (2003): 489-502. doi:10.1177/1090198103253650. 5 Ibid.

School Climate and Physical Health and Activity Level of Students

149

multilevel modeling.6 The researchers used a sample of 18,571 ninth-grade students distributed over 1,026 classes and 284 schools in greater Stockholm, Sweden. Both individual and contextual level associations between the elements of school climate and student health were studied. The findings indicated that students with better health were found in classes where many of the students reported a positive relationship with the teachers, particularly when teachers were responsive to the individual needs of the students. The researchers wrote, Better health was found in classes where many students reported getting immediate teacher help with their schoolwork, and worse health was found in classes where harassment was more commonly reported. These findings remained when a number of school-contextual characteristics were adjusted for.7

The study found that the health of students and their attitudes toward better health were mitigated by their perception of school climate, and in particular that most important element of school climate–positive relationships between staff and students. In an interesting study of school climate, student habits, and health by Booker, Gilford, Van Hattum, Rudov, and Carton, the researchers examined the implementation of the Healthy School Food Collaborative.8 The Healthy School Food Collaborative developed a project using the typical plate waste and menu analysis data to measure student consumption of macronutrients and added school climate components. The pilot design project included measures of the schools’ climate, as environmental factors. The researchers used the Cafeteria Environmental Scan to assess the cafeteria environment by considering indicators of sanitation, the promotion of wellness policies and healthy eating, and the presence of amenities such as water fountains and adequate lighting. This study found patterns of unhealthy food selections and food waste of nutritious foods related to student perceptions of school climate. The study strongly suggested that 6

Bitte Modin and Viveca Ostberg, “School Climate and Psychosomatic Health: A Multilevel Analysis,” School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 20, no. 4 (2009): 433-455. doi:10.1080/09243450903251507. 7 Ibid. 8 Brittany Booker, Jacqueline Gilford, Taslim Van Hattum, Lindsey Rudov, and Thomas Carton, “Methods beyond Plate Waste: Evaluating School Climate, Policy, and Student Satisfaction,” Paper presented at the American Public Health Association Conference, New Orleans, November 15, 2014.

150

Chapter Nine

elements of a school’s climate, such as cleanliness, adequate lighting, clean water fountains, and promotion of wellness policies by the school staff illustrate a concern for student health and are important in the process of getting students to make healthy food choices and to improve their attitudes about healthy choices. The effort to convince students to make healthier choices was supported by a study of students’ Body Mass Index (BMI) and its relationship with school climate, including connectedness, academic standards, engagement, and student autonomy. 9 The study examined the relationship between school climate and the BMI for urban preadolescent students. Student health surveys and physical measures in addition to the BMI were collected among fifth and sixth grade students in 12 randomly selected public schools in New England. A school climate survey was also completed by both students and teachers. The results found a significant correlation between school climate and BMI percentile, where the higher the school climate rating was, and consequently the better a student felt about his or her school environment, the lower the corresponding BMI percentile was. The researchers wrote: After controlling for potentially confounding individual-level characteristics, a 1-unit increase in school climate score (indicating more positive climate) was associated with a 7-point decrease in students' BMI percentile. Positive school climate is associated with lower student BMI percentile.10

This research suggests that improving school climate may benefit students in making healthy choices that significantly affect their health, including weight, because the stability of a school may influence not only attitudes, but also the amount of physical activity and the level of stress that impact students. These points were the subject of a study that considered how school climate may influence the physical activity of students.11 The researchers extracted data from a large-scale longitudinal study of schools in Quebec, Canada. Surveys were administered each year for six 9

Gilstad-Hayden, Carroll-Scott, Rosenthal, Peters, McCaslin, and Ickovics, “Positive School Climate,” 502-506. 10 Ibid. 11 Roman Pabayo, Michel Janosz, Sherri Bisset, and Ichiro Kawachi, “School Social Fragmentation, Economic Deprivation, and Social Cohesion and Adolescent Physical Inactivity: A Longitudinal Study,” PLOS One, 9, no. 6 (2014): e99154. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.099154.

School Climate and Physical Health and Activity Level of Students

151

years to 14,924 students in 70 schools who ranged in age from 12 to 18 years. The study found that students who rated their school with a positive school climate rating were more likely to participate in extra-curricular activities, including team sports and other after-school physical activities. The researchers found that perceptions of safety, belonging, being supported by peers and school staff were shown to be associated with physical activity. They wrote, We found that adolescents attending schools in the highest (compared to the lowest) levels of socioeconomic deprivation and social fragmentation were more likely to be physically inactive. Conversely, students attending schools with the highest cohesion were less likely to be physically inactive. In longitudinal analysis, physically active students who attended schools with the highest social fragmentation were more likely to become physically inactive over two years. The school environment appears to be an important contextual influence on participation in no physical activity among adolescents.12

This is a significant message for schools, parents, and health officials who are trying to combat the negative physical effects of student inactivity and indifference toward physical activity and poor health choices. Improving the school climate should be part of the overall strategy to address physical health issues that can impact student academic achievement. A study found that unclear goals and the lack of interpersonal interaction with staff were associated with students’ opinions that health education was insufficient.13 The study that supported those finding was conducted in Finland in a cross-sectional study combining data from two independent surveys used in 136 public schools, with 11,583 boys and 12,706 girls in the eighth and ninth grades participating in the surveys. Additionally, a personnel survey of 1,946 staff members was administered to measure school climate to determine levels of trust, opportunity for participation, support for innovative practices, orientation towards high quality work, and accepted and clear goals. School climate reported by school personnel was related to pupils’ reports of being heard at school, depression, physical and psychological symptoms, truancy, and how effective 12

Ibid. Marianna Virtanen, Mika Kivimaki, Pauliina Luopa, Jussi Vahtera, Marko Elovainio, Jukka Jokela, and Minna Pietikainen, “Staff Reports of Psychosocial Climate at School and Adolescents’ Health, Truancy and Health Education in Finland,” The European Journal of Public Health, 19, no. 5 (2014): 554-560. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckp032. 13

152

Chapter Nine

health education was received. The effect of activities to improve physical health and quality of life for students through health education was diminished when the school climate was not positive. When schools discerned above average levels of depression, physical, and psychological symptoms among students, a decision was made to address these issues through health education. But the significance of this study was the futility of the efforts when the school climate was negative. The best, most relevant, and potentially the most effective health education intervention may be compromised or completely neutralized by a negative school climate. Physical activity at school and the relationship with school climate was also the focus of a study of 24 middle schools and 137 students.14 The findings suggested that school environments with high levels of supervision and relationships with school staff and other elements related to school climate such as the physical conditions of the school stimulated girls and boys to be more physically active and participatory in school activities. In other types of studies that examined the relationship between student activity and school climate it was found that the two were linked. For example, in a study by Birnham, et al. it was found that school climate and girls’ level of physical activity were measurable and interconnected.15 Additionally, a study of active travel was linked to school climate. For students participating in active travel (using bikes or walking to school and other physical activities) the benefits were more pronounced and discernible if they were attending a school with a positive school climate, according to a study of fourth and fifth grade students who were studied over a seven-month period of time.16 14

James F. Sallis, Terry L. Conway, Judith J. Prochaska, Thomas L. McKenzie, Simon J. Marshall, and Marianne Brown, “The Association of School Environments with Youth Physical Activity,” American Journal of Public Health, 91 (2001): 618-620, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1446652/pdf/11291375.pdf. 15 Amanda S. Birnham, Kelly R. Evenson, Robert W. Motl, Rod K. Dishman, Carolyn C. Voorhees, James Sallis, John P. Elder, and Marsha Dowda, “Scale Development for Perceived School Climate for Girls’ Physical Activity,” American Journal of Health Behavior, 29, no. 3 (2005): 250-257, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2494732/. 16 Kelly R. Evenson, Robert W. Motl, Amanda S. Birnbaum, and Dianne S. Ward, “Measurement of Perceived School Climate for Active Travel in Children,” American Journal of Health Behavior, 31, no.1 (2007): 86-97. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5993/AJHB.31.1.9.

School Climate and Physical Health and Activity Level of Students

153

The apparent correlation between student physical activity and school climate seems to have much to do with students’ sense of security, safety, risk-taking, support and interactions with staff members. Students are more likely to become involved in school activities if they feel connected with the school, so it stands to reason that these activities would also include physical activities. It is interesting to note also how school climate seems to be at least an indirect factor in a student’s attitude toward physical activity, if not a direct factor.

Chapter Nine: School Climate and Physical Health and Activity Level of Students Summary Points An often unnoticed and underreported component of influence regarding school climate is the relationship between school climate and the physical health of students and their attitudes toward physical health and activities. School climate and the effectiveness of teaching influence current and future health and health behaviors of students. The health of a school’s climate may have implications for the effectiveness of school health promotion programs from the initial trial stage to institutionalization. Measures of school climate may be useful in determining a school's readiness to adopt and implement an innovative health promotion curriculum. Implementing programs to improve the physical health of students may be compromised in schools with a negative school climate. Better student health is found in students who feel like they are getting immediate teacher help with their schoolwork, and worse student health is found in classes where harassment is more commonly reported. Patterns of unhealthy food selections and food waste of nutritious foods are related to student perceptions of school climate. Elements of a school’s climate, such as cleanliness, adequate lighting, clean water fountains, and promotion of wellness policies that illustrate concern for student health, are important in the process of getting students to make healthy food choices. There is a significant correlation between school climate and the Body Mass Index (BMI) percentile, where higher school climate ratings matched with lower corresponding BMI percentiles.

154

Chapter Nine

Improving school climate may benefit students in making healthy choices that affect their weight. The stability of school climate may influence not only attitudes, but also the amount of physical activity and the level of stress of students. Students who rate their school with a positive school climate rating are more likely to participate in extra-curricular activities, including team sports and other after-school physical activities. Improving school climate should be part of the overall strategy to address student physical health issues. Unclear goals and the lack of interpersonal interaction with staff are associated with students’ opinions that health education is insufficient. School environments with high levels of supervision and relationships with school staff and other elements related to school climate, such as the physical conditions of the school, stimulate girls and boys to be more physically active and participatory in school activities. For students participating in active travel (using bikes or walking to school and other physical activities) the benefits are more pronounced and discernible if they are attending a school with a positive school climate. Students are more likely to become involved in school physical activities if they feel connected with the school.

CHAPTER TEN SCHOOL CLIMATE AND INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT (SCHOOL BUILDING AND GROUNDS)

“A functional relationship exists between a school’s physical environment and both an increase in levels of academic engagement and a decrease in levels of disruptive behavior.” —Guardino and Antia1

The term school climate often evokes discussions that focus on safety based on the control of behavior, such as the control of student behavior and control of people external to the school that may compromise safety. However, school climate includes the conditions of the school building, too. Improving school climate without considering the physical conditions of schools will be counterproductive. The physical condition of many of the public schools in America is disquieting. Mary Filardo of the Economic Policy Institute wrote a compelling article about the condition of public schools in America. In her article entitled “Good Buildings, Better Schools,” she wrote, Evidence abounds that, even after over $500 billion of capital outlays in the decade between 1995 and 2004, public school facilities, particularly in low-wealth communities, have substantial deficiencies. In 31 states, plaintiffs have challenged the adequacy or equity of public education funding in low-income communities and have made facility conditions an element of their lawsuits. In four states, the condition of facilities was the exclusive focus of the suit (Education Law Center 2006). Another indicator that serious building deficiencies are the norm rather than the exception is the 1

Caroline Guardino and Shirin D. Antia, “Modifying the Classroom Environment to Increase and Decrease Disruption with Students Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing,” Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 17, no. 4 (2012): 518-533. doi:10.1093/deafed/ens026.

156

Chapter Ten American Society of Civil Engineers report card on infrastructure. The society began including public schools in its infrastructure report card in 1998; in that year it gave public schools an F, followed by a D- in 2001 and 2003, and a D in 2005. While this is progress, as one would hope after a half-trillion dollar investment during 1995-2004 the still-low overall grade indicated how great the needs were in 1995 and how challenging it is to keep up with building maintenance, lifecycle replacements, new educational design, and enrollment change. And, of course, the overall national grade says nothing about how badly certain states and localities are failing. Substandard conditions, design, and utilization take many forms. Poor school design and facility conditions can lead to ‘sick building syndrome,’ according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 2000). Twothirds of teachers in the District of Columbia reported poor air quality in their classrooms (Schneider 2003). The General Accounting Office (GAO) found that one in five students nationwide attend a school that suffers from poor ventilation; poor ventilation can boost rates of asthma and respiratory illness, both of which are disproportionately observed in urban schools (EPA 2000). The temperature and humidity in classrooms can affect children's health and motivation. One study of Florida classrooms found many with mold growing inside ceilings, triggering allergic symptoms.2

In 2000, the U.S. National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) reported that at least 29 percent of the nation’s schools had problems with heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning; 25 percent had plumbing problems; 24 percent reported problems with exterior walls, finishes, windows, and doors; and about 20 percent had less than adequate conditions for safety, roofs, and electrical power. The NCES reported that each year 11 million students attend schools in buildings with inadequate physical conditions. Of these students approximately 3.5 million students attended schools in which the condition was rated as poor, replacement was needed, or significant substandard performance was apparent.3 Filardo reports that, Maintenance and repair as well as custodial and budgets are often underfunded, and maintenance is often deferred over a period of years. For example, the Portland Public Schools estimate an $800 million deferred maintenance backlog and the Los Angeles Unified School District estimates a $5 billion backlog in their existing facilities. Particularly given ris2

Mary Filardo, “Good Buildings, Better Schools: An Economic Stimulus Opportunity with Long-Term Benefits,” Briefing Paper 216, Economic Policy Institute, April 29, 2008, http://www.gpn.org/bp216/bp216.pdf. 3 Digest of Education Statistics, U.S. National Center for Educational Statistics, January 2001, https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/.

School Climate and Institutional Environment

157

ing utility costs, basic building cleaning, expanding early childhood education, and the pressure to reduce class sizes, maintenance and repair are cut back to address other demands on school district budgets. The overall percentage of school district spending on maintenance and operations declined from 12.75% in 1988 to 7.58% in 2006; it rose to 9.19% in 2007, largely due to rising costs of utilities.4

Many of the problems stem from the fact that several public schools are simply very old. The average age of public school buildings in the United States is 42 years. Over 45 percent of all public schools were built between 1950 and 1969. In Wisconsin, 75 percent of the public school buildings were built before 1970. The average age of public schools in Washington, D.C. is 65 years. There are many other examples of school building conditions across the nation. Other than the obvious safety and security issues related to school building conditions, research has shown that the condition of the school building can have an impact on student achievement. Schneider examined the relationship between the condition of school buildings and student achievement scores in two large urban school districts, Washington, D.C., and Chicago, Illinois.5 He used the results of the reading and math scores on the Stanford Achievement Test in Washington, D.C., and the Iowa Test of Basic Skills in Chicago. In Washington, D.C. the difference in achievement scores was reported as the percentage of students performing above the basic level of achievement for the grade. In Chicago, the difference was reported as the percentage of students performing at grade level. While controlling for factors such as poverty, ethnicity, and school size, Schneider found a significant difference in both cities in the academic performance of students when controlling for school building conditions. The students in schools with good conditions were performing from 3 to 4 percentage points better than students in buildings with poor conditions. In Washington, there was a difference of 3 percent in both reading and math between students in good and poor buildings. In Chicago, students in good

4

Joe Agron, “36th Annual Maintenance and Operations Cost Study: Schools,” School Planning and Management Magazine, April Issue, 2007, http://asumag.com/maintenance/36th-annual-maintenance-operations-cost-studycolleges. 5 Mark Schneider, “Do School Facilities Affect Academic Outcomes?” National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities, ED 470 979, 2002, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED470979.pdf.

158

Chapter Ten

condition buildings scored 3 percent higher in reading and 4 percent higher in math. The differences were statistically significant. Weinstein reviewed research on the physical environment of schools and found a significant correlation between a school’s environment, namely the conditions of the school facility on student behavior, attitudes, and achievement.6 The research found that classroom conditions, such as the design and maintenance of the classroom, including the condition of student desks, impacts student performance and satisfaction with school, as well as a sense of safety and security. Other environmental factors of the school building were equally important, with noise levels and the absence and conditions of doors and windows being important to the overall school climate. Uline and Tschannen-Moran, in an article entitled “The Walls Speak,” discussed the interplay among quality facilities, school climate, and student achievement. 7 The researchers surveyed teachers from 80 middle schools in Virginia using the School Climate Index, a 7-item quality of school facilities scale, as well as three resource support items. They also examined data on students’ socioeconomic status (SES) and student achievement. A correlational analysis was used to examine the relationships between the quality of facilities, resource support, school climate, student SES, and student achievement. Regression analysis was used to determine if school climate was a mediating variable between the quality of facilities and student achievement. The researchers stated that, “Results confirmed a link between the quality of school facilities and student achievement in English and mathematics. As well, quality facilities were significantly positively related to three school climate variables.”8 It is also important to note that the findings included confirmation that school climate plays a significant mediating role in the relationship between school facility quality and student achievement. It is possible for an otherwise positive school climate to compensate in part for a less than quality school facility? Branham (2004) studied the relationship between inadequate school infrastructure and student perfor6

Carol S. Weinstein, “The Physical Environment of the School: A Review of the Research,” Review of Educational Research, 49, no. 4 (1979): 577-610. doi:10.3102/00346543049004577. 7 Cynthia Uline and Megan Tschannen-Moran, “The Walls Speak: The Interplay of Quality Facilities, School Climate, and Student Achievement,” Journal of Educational Administration, 46, no. 1 (2008): 55-73. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09578230810849817. 8 Ibid.

School Climate and Institutional Environment

159

mance using 226 schools in the Houston Independent School District (HISD). The study focused on the relationship between problematic school infrastructure and student achievement. The HISD was selected for the study because it had students from various ethnic backgrounds, including students from economically disadvantaged families, students with limited English proficiency, and students from affluent families. To assess school infrastructure at individual schools, four specific variables were examined: 1) the amount of temporary space schools used, 2) whether or not the school was in need of roof repair, 3) the number of custodians at the school, and 4) the total amount of facility space per student. The researchers used student attendance percentage, dropout percentage, and school performance on the HISD performance rating, which is a rating of the school based on students’ performance on the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills Tests, as the study’s impact measures. The results of the study indicated that school infrastructure had a critical impact on student achievement and student attitudes about school climate. Specifically, schools in need of basic repairs, such as roof repairs or that depend on temporary buildings or space, were found to have lower student achievement and higher levels of student disruption. Also, understaffing custodial services created an unclean environment that the authors found had a negative impact on student attendance and undermined student feelings of safety and security. Another study in Texas related to school facilities; O’Neill investigated the possible impact of school facilities on student achievement, behavior, attendance, and teacher turnover rates at Central Texas middle schools in the Region XIII Educational Service Center (ESC) area.9 The principals of 70 middle schools participated in the study, which included the completion of a school climate survey. Additionally, the study used personal interviews and a statistical review of qualitative and quantitative data related to student achievement, behavior, attendance, and teacher turnover rate as sources of information. The researcher collected three years of data on teacher turnover rate, as well as data on economically disadvantaged students, average daily attendance and average membership (enrollment). The instrument created and used for assessment of the school facilities was called the Total Learning Environment Assessment (TLEA). Additionally, 9

David John O’Neill, “The Impact of School Facilities on Student Achievement, Behavior, Attendance, and Teacher Turnover Rate at Selected Texas Middle Schools in Region XIII ESC” (dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station, 2000).

160

Chapter Ten

sections of the Guide for School Facility Appraisal, an instrument produced by the Council of Educational Facility Planners, were incorporated into the TLEA. The study found a correlation between the conditions of school buildings and student achievement, behavior, attendance, and teacher turnover rate. In school facilities with poor building conditions researchers found lower TLEA results and increased student misbehavior and diminished student achievement, as well as higher teacher turnover rates. A study of school conditions in Texas found a relationship between school facilities and student achievement as measured by the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) in high-performing, high poverty school districts. 10 The study investigated whether the conditions of the school facilities in the Ysleta Independent School District (ISD), located near El Paso, Texas, were related to student achievement and student sense of security over an 8-year period. Twenty-nine schools participated in the study: 4 high schools, 11 middle schools, and 14 elementary schools. The variables examined included building and classroom conditions, the socioeconomic status of the schools, the demographics of the schools, the schedules of renovation and construction, the criteria used to determine priorities regarding district capital expenditures and financial information concerning the availability of funds. The findings suggested that the conditions of school facilities were correlated to student outcomes, including student achievement, attendance, and perception of the school environment. The long-term effect on these outcomes was significant. Lewis studied 139 Milwaukee public schools and examined the association of building conditions with student test scores compared to other influences such as family background, socioeconomic status, attendance, and race/ethnicity.11 The study analyzed the performance on the Wisconsin Student Assessment System Mathematics, Science, Language, and Social Studies tests of fourth, eighth, and tenth grades of each school over a 3year period. The study reported that a relationship existed between student achievement and facility conditions. In a related study, Chen and Weikert examined the relationship between student background, school climate, school disorder, school size, and student achievement, and tested a school 10

Susan B. Lair, “A Study of the Effect School Facility Conditions Have on Student Achievement” (dissertation, University of Texas, Austin, 2003), http://hdl.handle.net/2152/12191. 11 Morgan Lewis, “Where Children Learn: Facilities Condition and Student Test Performance in Milwaukee Public Schools,” Council of Educational Facility Planners, Scottsdale, Arizona, 2001, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED459593.pdf.

School Climate and Institutional Environment

161

disorder and student achievement model based upon the school climate framework. 12 The model was applied to 212 New York City middle schools using the Structural Equations Modeling Analysis method. The study found that school disorder typically associated with lower levels of socioeconomic conditions can be mediated through positive school climate. The researchers also reported that, Additionally, it was found that the effect of school size is in the hypothesized direction, i.e., smaller schools tend to have lower disorder and higher learning. Nevertheless, the effect is small and statistically insignificant, after controlling for student background and school culture variables in the model. The evidence of the study implies that school culture as reflected in school disorder and student attendance holds great potential for improving student learning. The reduction of school size, as currently used by many school districts to improve student learning, may prove to be ineffective if applied alone without regard to school culture and school conditions.13

The double-trouble for schools is a school with facility issues and other negative school climate components. In those circumstances, the students have very little likelihood of fulfilling their potential and teachers will find the conditions for learning compromised. Woolner, McCarter, Wall, and Higgins found that the interaction of the physical conditions of the school and the school climate were important for all students, but especially important for students with special needs.14 They looked at the classroom level where the physical school climate and the manipulation of the structure of the classroom impacted in either a negative or positive way the climate of the classroom as measured by the interactions between the teachers and students. The researchers pointed out that often the physical features of a school down to the classroom level are seldom changed–almost as if they are ignored, taken for granted, or are not “seen.” The study suggested that the physical climate can be manipulated to improve the learning climate and the overall school climate. Guardino and Antia confirmed these findings when they examined the effect of school physical plant and the classroom with deaf or hard of hearing stu12

Chen and Weikert, “Student Background, School Climate, School Disorder, and Student Achievement,” 3-20. 13 Ibid. 14 Pamela Woolner, Sheila McCarter, Kate Wall, and Steve Higgins, “Changed Learning through Changed Space: When Can a Participatory Approach to the Learning Environment Challenge Preconceptions and Alter Practice?” Improving Schools, 15, no. 1 (2012): 45-60. doi:10.1177/1365480211434796.

162

Chapter Ten

dents.15 The goal of the study was to examine the effect of physical changes of the school to the academic engagement and behavior of the students. Three classrooms were modified including changes in seating arrangements, classroom organization, visual stimulation, and acoustic quality. The researchers reported that A multiple-baseline design was used to examine the effects of the intervention on the frequency of student academic engagement and disruptive behaviors. Results show a functional relationship between the school physical environment and both an increase in levels of academic engagement and a decrease in levels of disruptive behavior. Teachers maintained the modifications after the study ceased.16

By modifying and improving the physical features of the classrooms the school climate improved, which led to more positive teacher-student relationships and to increased student academic outcomes and reduced misbehavior. Discussions about the possible relationship between the physical building components of school climate and student behavior must also consider the design of schools. This was the focus of a study by Tanner.17 He studied the effects of school design on third grade student academic outcomes, using results from the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills. The sample was 1,916 third grade students from 24 elementary schools. According to the researcher, The independent variable set for developing a possible explanation of student achievement was the school's physical environment, defined as four sets of design patterns: movement and circulation (e.g., adequate personal space and efficient movement patterns throughout the school), large group meeting places (e.g., social gathering places), day lighting and views (e.g., windows with natural light), and instructional neighborhoods (e.g., large and small group areas that accommodate wet and dry activities).18

The results indicated a positive correlation between the four design variables and student academic outcomes, indicating that the physical as15

Guardino and Antia, Modifying the Classroom Environment, 518-533. Ibid. 17 C. Kenneth Tanner, “Explaining Relationships among Student Outcomes and the School’s Physical Environment,” Journal of Advanced Academics, 19, no. 3 (2008): 444-471, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ810757.pdf. 18 Ibid. 16

School Climate and Institutional Environment

163

pects of school climate were important to student success. These findings were supported by the results of a study that considered the effects of school design, curriculum delivery, and school climate.19 The researcher conducted a study of a public high school that included a review of the school’s physical design and how it interfaced with the school’s curriculum and the reaction of students. Not only did the researcher find that the match between the school design and curriculum impacted student outcomes, he also discovered that other physical features of the facility positively affected student-to-student interactions. Consequently, according to the researcher, “Students…felt more socially accepted at [the school] and better enjoyed their time in school in comparison with other high schools they had attended.” Also, some specific features of school design can impact the school’s climate with regard to how students react to those building features. For example, in a study that examined the impact of fluorescent lighting on student on-task behavior, the researcher discovered that students displayed more comfort with the school’s climate and subsequently had higher levels of on-task behavior when under lighting that modulated glare.20 The physical environment of the school, as a component of school climate, was found by Pashiardis to impact student perceptions of the learning environment in other cultures.21 Pashiardis’ study in Cyprus schools included a questionnaire of 53 statements related to school climate (physical, social, and learning environment). The findings indicated that students who were only moderately satisfied with the school’s physical elements were not positive about the overall school climate. Although Suldo, McMahan, Chappel, and Loker primarily studied the relationship between school climate and adolescent mental health across genders, a component of the study included the effect of school building

19

Neil Gislason, “Mapping School Design: A Qualitative Study of the Relations among Facilities Design, Curriculum Delivery, and School Climate,” The Journal of Environmental Education, 40, no. 4 (2009): 17-34, http://online.tarleton.edu/ACEF/ACEFJournalVolume3Issue2/index.html#/26/. 20 Alana S. Pulay, “The Impact of the Correlated Color Temperature of Fluorescent Lighting and Its Influence on Student On-Task Behavior in an Elementary School Classroom” (dissertation, Oregon State University, Corvallis, 2015), http://hdl.handle.net/1957/56296. 21 Georgia Pashiardis, “Toward a Knowledge Base for School Climate in Cyprus Schools,” International Journal of Educational Management, 22, no. 5 (2008): 399-416. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513540810883140.

164

Chapter Ten

appearance on the mental health of students. 22 The study included 415 high school students. A positive perception of each school climate dimension, including school building appearance, was found to be linked to better mental health. The researchers noted negative perceptions of peer interpersonal relations, unequal sharing of school resources, and unattractive physical appearance of school buildings uniquely predicted greater psychopathology. School climate includes the physical conditions and the maintenance of the school. There are schools over 40 years old that run efficiently, are extremely clean, and are well-organized and designed to enhance functionality, and have a positive school climate. Conversely, there are schools that are relatively new that are unclean, unsafe, and improperly organized, and have a negative school climate. The condition of the school building matters and it’s difficult to effectively change school climate without also improving those building conditions.

Chapter Ten: School Climate and Institutional Environment (School Buildings and Grounds) Summary Points School climate includes the physical conditions of the school building. Public school facilities, particularly in low-wealth communities, have substantially more school facility deficiencies. Poor school design and facility conditions can lead to “sick building syndrome,” which results in more student absences from school. One in five students nationwide attends a school that suffers from poor ventilation. Poor ventilation can boost rates of asthma and respiratory illness, both of which are disproportionately observed in urban schools and negatively impact student attendance. At least 29 percent of the nation’s schools have problems with heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning; 25 percent have plumbing problems; 24 percent have problems with exterior walls, finishes, windows, and doors; and about 20 percent have less than adequate conditions for safety, roofs, and electrical power. Each year approximately 11 million students attend schools in buildings with inadequate physical conditions.

22

Suldo, McMahan, Chappel, and Loker, “Relationships between Perceived School Climate,” 69-80.

School Climate and Institutional Environment

165

The average age of public school buildings in the United States is 42 years. Over 45 percent of all public schools were built between 1950 and 1969. Other than the obvious safety and security issues related to school building conditions, the condition of the school building can have an impact on student achievement. A significant correlation exists between a school’s environment, namely the conditions of the school facility, student behavior, attitudes, and achievement. School facility conditions such as the design and maintenance of the classroom, including the condition of student desks, impacts student performance and satisfaction with school, as well as a sense of safety and security. It is possible for an otherwise positive school climate to compensate, but only in part for a less than quality school facility. Schools in need of basic repairs such as roof repairs or that use temporary buildings or space have lower student achievement and higher levels of student disruption. School facilities with poor building conditions have lower school climate results and increases in student misbehavior and diminished student achievement and higher teacher turnover rates. The reduction of school size, as currently used by many school districts to improve student learning, may prove to be ineffective if applied alone without regard to school climate and its resulting school climate. The double-trouble for schools is a school facility in poor physical condition in addition to other negative school climate elements. In those circumstances, the students have very little likelihood of fulfilling their potential and teachers will find the conditions for learning compromised. The interaction of the physical components of the school and the school climate is important for all students, but especially important for students with special needs. By modifying and improving the physical features of the classrooms school climate can improve, which leads to more positive teacherstudent relationships and to increased student academic outcomes and reduced misbehavior. Student achievement and school climate are related to the school's physical environment, defined primarily as four sets of design patterns: movement and circulation; large group meetings; day lighting and views; and instructional neighborhoods.

166

Chapter Ten

Negative perceptions of peer interpersonal relations, unequal sharing of school resources and an unattractive physical appearance of school buildings are predictive of greater psychopathology among students and diminished student achievement outcomes.

CHAPTER ELEVEN SCHOOL CLIMATE ASSESSMENT

“School districts and states should consider including multiple data sources when assessing school climate.” —Nick White, Tamika LaSalle, Jeffrey S. Ashby, and Joel Meyers1

The assessment of school and classroom climates has become an important component of school climate research and school improvement strategies, as well as school climate intervention program evaluations. School climate surveys and other types of instruments vary in many ways, but most of them focus on at least one or more of the four important elements of relationships, institutional environment, teaching and learning, and safety. One of the first school climate ratings was the Finlayson School Climate Questionnaires administered to students in Australian schools in 1977. In a study of the Finlayson Questionnaires it was found that they could be used to measure factors relevant to the concept of school climate, such as safety, security, attitudes, and relationships. 2 One the longeststanding school climate surveys that remains in use today is the Quality of School Life (QSL) survey. The QSL is defined by three dimensions of student reactions: (1) satisfaction with school in general, (2) commitment to school work, and (3) attitudes toward teachers. It is a 27-item survey that shows reliability and validity across educational levels (elementary, middle and high school) as demonstrated by using measures of academic achievement, participation, personality, family background, and sociometric data from peers and teachers.3 1

Nick White, Tamika LaSalle, Jeffrey S. Ashby, and Joel Meyers, “A Brief Measure of Adolescent Perceptions of School Climate,” School Psychology Quarterly, 29, no. 3 (2014): 349-359. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/spq0000075. 2 R.A. Ecclestone, An Application of the Finlayson School Climate Scales to Four Seventh-Day Adventist Secondary Schools (Avondale College: University of New England, 1978). 3 Joyce L. Epstein and James M. McPartland, Family and School Interactions and Main Effects on Affective Outcomes, Report No. 235 (Washington, D.C.: John

168

Chapter Eleven

Many school climate surveys are structured inventories that ask the respondent to react to a statement describing a specific element of school climate such as, “I have been picked on during the last 30 days.” These types of assessments often include a group-level aggregation of respondents’ reports of their own behaviors and attitudes, as well as the correlation or congruence between different sets of respondents on the surveys.4 Some surveys are constructed to allow for congruency measures, to ascertain the level of agreement between and among students, parents, and teachers.5 A few school climate instruments have created a “congruency score” based on the comparison of student and teacher survey results. Mitchell, Bradshaw, and Leaf in a study of student and teacher survey responses on a school climate rating survey found that there was discernible, important, and useful information from congruency scores that highlighted the differences and similarities in the student and teacher perceptions of school climate elements.6 The researchers noted Teacher ratings were more sensitive to classroom-level factors, such as poor classroom management and the proportion of students with disruptive behaviors, whereas student ratings were more influenced by school-level factors such as student mobility, student-teacher relationships, and principal turnover. The discrepancy in ratings of academic emphasis suggests that while all of the respondents may have shared objectively similar experiences, their perceptions of those experiences varied significantly. These Hopkins University Center for the Study of Social Organization of Schools, National Institute of Education, 1976), http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED151713.pdf; Williams, J., and Batten, M. The Quality of School Life (Hawthorn, Victoria: The Australian Council for Educational Research, 1981); Jeffrey W. Bulcock, “Indicators of the Quality of School Life: A Validation Study,” Paper presented at the International Symposium on the Methodological Aspects of Empirical Research in Sociology, Institute of Sociological Research, The USSR Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 1988. 4 Oliver Lüdtke, Herbert W. Marsh, Alexander Robitzsch, Ulrich Trautwein, Tihomir Asparouhov, and Bengt Muthén, “The Multilevel Latent Covariate Model: A New, More Reliable Approach to Group-Level Effects in Contextual Studies,” Psychological Methods, 13, no. 3 (2008): 203-209. doi:10.1037/a0012869. 5 Brand, Felner, Seitsinger, Burns, and Bolton, “A Large Scale Study, 507-535. 6 Mary M. Mitchell, Catherine P. Bradshaw, and Philip J. Leaf, “Student and Teacher Perceptions of School Climate: A Multilevel Exploration of Patterns of Discrepancy,” Journal of School Health, 80, no. 6 (2010): 271-279, http://donnieholland.wiki.westga.edu/file/view/Student%26Teacher+perception+of +school+climate.pdf/349266918/Student%26Teacher+perception+of+school+clim ate.pdf.

School Climate Assessment

169

results emphasize the importance of assessing both student and teacher perceptions in future research on school climate.7

Griffith examined the congruency among students and parents regarding their perceptions of school climate.8 He studied survey responses of 25,557 elementary students and their parents (23,107). The results indicated a consensus among student and parent perceptions of school climate, but there were some differences worth noting. According to the researcher, “Schools having more racially and ethnically diverse student populations and more newcomers to the school showed significantly less student and parent consensus regarding the school environment.” Additionally, it appeared that students and parents had the highest levels of congruency when they indicated a positive perception of school climate. The congruency started breaking down when the survey results moved toward a negative perception on either the parent side or student side. Another study of school climate survey congruency among students, teachers, and principals found only a modicum of agreement about school climate among the survey participants, and the researchers concluded that school climate surveys were therefore possibly unreliable.9 However, what was not addressed by the researchers was the wealth of information gained even with low levels of congruency. Those data are indicative, perhaps, of problems within the school regarding the relationships and perceptions among the students and staff. That information itself is very valuable in determining what schools need to address to improve school climate. Additionally, the findings from Mitchell, Bradshaw, and Leaf should be kept in mind when discerning the significance and meaning of low congruency between students and teachers.10 It is possible that teachers’ school climate perception is more classroom-focused, while the students’ school climate perception is a broader view of the school, particularly for students in middle and high school, 7

Ibid. James Griffith, “School Climate as Group Evaluation and Group Consensus: Student and Parent Perceptions of the Elementary School Environment,” The Elementary School Journal, 101, no. 1 (2000): 35-61, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1002334. 9 Janie L. Nusser and Emil J. Haller, “Alternative Perceptions of a School’s Climate: Do Principals, Students and Teachers Agree?” Paper presented at the American Research Council Annual Conference, San Francisco, April 18, 1995, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED390138.pdf. 10 Mitchell, Bradshaw, and Leaf, “Student and Teacher Perceptions of School Climate,” 271-279. 8

170

Chapter Eleven

because they are changing classes during the day, frequent hallways and restrooms and other parts of the building more often than teachers. Most school climate surveys are anonymous and are described as purposeful to the respondents. For example, the Georgia Student Health Survey (GSHS) 2.0 is an anonymous survey created by the Georgia Department of Education and Georgia State University. The GSHS 2.0 assists in the identification of safety and health issues that may negatively impact student achievement so that local schools and school districts can develop and implement prevention and intervention strategies that are targeted to specific issues identified by the survey results. The survey is for grades 3 through 12, with the third and fifth grade versions simplified to 12 teacherguided questions. The middle and high school version of the survey includes over 100 questions taken anonymously online. Studies have supported its reliability and validity.11 During the 2014-2015 school year, over one million students took the survey. There are two companion surveys to the GSHS 2.0–the Parent Survey and the School Personnel Survey. These are administered also online during the same assessment window as the GSHS 2.0. All of the Georgia Surveys are used as part of the state’s calculation of a School Climate Star Rating for each school. A modified version of the GSHS 2.0 was developed by Georgia State University. In a study, 130,968 students in grades 6 through 8 took the Georgia Brief School Climate Inventory (GaBSCI), a survey with only nine items. 12 The researchers stated that Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses verified the scale’s structure. Student perceptions of climate from the GaBSCI varied based on race/ethnicity, gender, and grade. Additional support for the construct validity of the GaBSCI was obtained based on its relationships with several

11

Tamika La Salle and J. Freeman, “School Climate Survey Validation Study,” Paper presented at the National PBIS Leadership Conference: Rosemont, 2014; La Salle, T. P., Joel Meyers, Davis, D., and Georgia Department of Education. (In revision). “School Climate Accountability: Examining the Favor Structure of the Georgia comprehensive School Climate Inventory,” Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia; Tamika La Salle, F. Zabeck, and J. Meyers, (accepted for publication) “Elementary Student Perceptions of School Climate and Associations with Student and School Actors,” School Psychology Forum. 12 Nick White, Tamika LaSalle, Jeffrey S. Ashby, and Joel Meyers, “A Brief Measure of Adolescent Perceptions of School Climate,” School Psychology Quarterly, 29, no. 3 (2014): 349-359. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/spq0000075.

School Climate Assessment

171

behaviors related to bullying, and the moderating effects of grade and gender on these relationships.13

The authors of the GaBSCI indicated that it can be used as a general measure to monitor student perceptions of school climate. A growing number of school climate surveys are intended to explore the relationship between school climate and student academic outcomes.14 Using school climate survey results as part of academic progress measures is being done in a few school districts and at the state level, while even more are considering how to accomplish this.15 Recognizing the correlation between school climate and student academic outcomes, Georgia became one of the first states in the nation to include school climate as a diagnostic tool within its statewide accountability system–the College and Career Readiness Performance Index (CCRPI). The CCRPI uses 19 academic factors to generate a score for each school on a scale of 1-100. School Climate Star Ratings are also part of the CCRPI. All public schools in Georgia receive a School Climate Star Rating based upon data from the GSHS 2.0, the Parent Survey, the School Personnel Survey, weighted disciplinary data, attendance data, and internal metrics of the GSHS 2.0 survey that captures school climate, risk factors, and protective factors. In a study of the School Climate Star Rating, data were matched with academic data from the CCRPI to determine the relationship between school climate ratings and student academic outcomes. By doing this match, the state was able to determine that schools with a positive school climate rating had significantly higher academic outcomes. 16 For example, schools with a School Climate Rating of 5 (on a scale of 1-5 with 5 being Excellent) 13

Ibid. Tschannen-Moran, Parish, and DiPaola, “School Climate: The Interplay,” 386415. 15 Jonah E. Rockoff and Lesley J. Turner, “Short-Run Impacts of Accountability on School Quality,” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2, no. 4 (210): 119-147, http:www.nber.org/papers/w14564; Lori Nathanson, Meghan McCormick, James J. Kemple, and Lauren Sypek, Strengthening Assessments of School Climate: Lessons from the NYC School Survey (New York: Research Alliance for New York City Schools, 2013), http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED543180.pdf; Nivri Shah, “States Use School Score Cards to Target Climate Problems,” Education Week, 32, no. 26 (2013): 12, http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2013/03/27/26climate.h32.html. 16 D. Ayoubi and Garry McGiboney, “Comparison of School Climate Star Ratings and College and Career Ready Performance Index” (Atlanta: Georgia Department of Education, Policy Division, 2014). 14

172

Chapter Eleven

scored 21 points higher on the CCRPI than schools with a School Climate Rating of 1 (CCRPI score of 72 compared to 51). Other school climate measures that provide significant information for schools and school districts include the statewide California School Climate, Health, and Learning Survey (Cal-SCHLS), which is used for identifying areas of needs, for monitoring improvements in school climate, and for differentiating between individual perceptions of school climate and school-to-school comparisons. In a study of the validity and reliability of the Cal-SCHLS, researchers found that, All the school-level school climate measures were associated in expected ways with student academic performance and suspensions. Student performance was higher and suspension rates were lower in schools with a positive school climate. These results support the validity of the survey measures for each of the school climate domains identified in the study.17

One of the other statewide surveys for high school students that is used to measure violence-related behaviors, bullying, depression, suicide, tobacco use, alcohol use, drug use, student-teacher relationships, safety, school connectedness, orderliness and discipline, as well as the physical features of the school is the Youth Risk Behavior Survey and Safe Communities Safe Schools Climate Survey. The Safe Communities Safe Schools Program School Climate Survey includes a student survey (grades 3 through 12), an administrator and staff survey, and a parent survey. The surveys gather information about bullying, perceptions of safety, perpetration of aggression, tobacco and drug use, bonding, parental control and monitoring, involvement in community activities, physical health, truancy and academic self-efficacy. It is worth noting that a study of the Safe Communities Safe Schools Program School Climate Survey with 20,953 students confirmed that the four major groupings of the survey explained approximately 63 percent of the variance.18 Other studies of the survey include research of a 2010 study by Zullig, Koopman, Patton, and Ubbes 17

Thomas Hanson and Adam Voight, The Appropriateness of a California Student and Staff Survey for Measuring Middle School Climate (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, 2014), http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/west/pdf/REL_2014039.pdf. 18 Keith J. Zullig, Rani Collins, Nadia Ghani, Jon M. Patton, E. Scott Huebner, and Jea Ajamie, “Psychometric Support of the School Climate Measure in a Large, Diverse Sample of Adolescents: A Replication and Extension,” Journal of School Health, 84, no. 2 (2014): 82-90. doi:10.1111/josh.12124.

School Climate Assessment

173

that supported the use of the survey as a prescriptive means of identifying elements of school climate that need improvement or interventions.19 Another statewide school climate survey is the Alaska School Climate and Connectedness Survey (ASCCS).20 The ASCCS is for students and staff and includes elements related to high expectations; school safety; school leadership and student involvement; respectful climate; peer climate; caring adults; parent and community involvement; social and emotional learning; student delinquent behaviors; and student drug and alcohol use. Research on the ASCCS by the American Institutes for Research confirmed the validation of the survey, and research by Kendziora and Spier supported the use of the ASCCS to measure school climate elements in a prescriptive manner.21 The Delaware School Climate Survey–Student (DSCS–S) was developed to provide schools with a student survey that assesses school climate dimensions of social support and structure.22 This study, conducted on a sample of 11,780 students in 85 schools, showed that a bi-factor model consisting of five specific factors and one general factor (School Climate) best represented the data. Those five factors are represented in five subscales of the DSCS–S: Teacher–Student Relations, Student–Student Relations, Fairness of Rules, Liking of School, and School Safety. According to the researchers The factor structure was shown to be stable across grade levels (i.e., elementary, middle, and high school), racial–ethnic groups (i.e., Caucasian, African-American, and Hispanic), and gender. As evidence of the survey's 19

Keith J. Zullig, Tommy M. Koopman, Jon M. Patton, and Valerie Ubbes, “School Climate: Historical Review, Instrument Development, and School Assessment,” Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 28, (2010): 139-152. doi:10.1177/0734282909344205. 20 American Institutes for Research for the Association of Alaska School Boards, “Alaska School Climate and Connectedness Survey: 2014 Statewide Report,” http://alaskaice.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/SCCS-2014Statewide-Report-combined.pdf. 21 American Institutes for Research. “2010 School Climate and Connectedness Survey Statewide Report: Student and Staff Results,” Washington, D.C.: American Institutes for Research, 2010); K. Kendziora and E. Spier, Memo regarding the Alaska School Climate and Connectedness Survey, American Institutes for Research, 2011. 22 “Delaware School Climate Survey,” University of Delaware, College of Education and Human Development. Delaware Positive Behavior Support Project, http://wordpress.oet.udel.edu/pbs/school-climate/de-school-climate-survey/.

174

Chapter Eleven concurrent validity, scores for each of the five sub-scales and the total scale correlated moderately, across groups and at the school level, with academic achievement and suspensions and expulsions.23

Delaware also developed the Delaware School Climate Survey–Home Edition that includes seven factors: Teacher–Student Relations; Student– Student Relations; Teacher–Home Communication; Respect for Diversity; Fairness of Rules; Clarity of Expectations, and School Safety.24 In a study with a sample of 16,173 parents/guardians, a factor analysis confirmed the validity and reliability of the survey and its seven factors.25 The National School Climate Center offers a comprehensive school climate survey–the Comprehensive School Climate Inventory (CSCI). 26 The CSCI is a scientifically researched survey that offers feedback on how students, parents, and school personnel perceive a school's climate by considering several factors. The CSCI was vetted by the National School Climate Council, three independent reviews of school climate measures, and a core group of practice and policy leaders. It measures perceptions about orderliness, instructional leadership; positive learning environment; parent and community involvement; expectations of students, staff, and parents; collaboration between and among administrators, faculty, and students; physical and emotional bullying; the physical environment of the school; social and civic learning; relationships; respect and diversity; and openness. Validation and reliability studies confirm these elements and the use of the instrument as a researched-based means of measuring school climate.27

23

Ibid. Ibid. 25 George G. Bear, Chunyan Yang, Megan Pell, and Claire Gaskins, “Validation of a Brief Measure of Teachers’ Perceptions of School Climate: Relations to Student Achievement and Suspensions,” Learning Environment Research, 17 (2012): 339354, http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10984-014-9162-1#page-1. 26 “Comprehensive School Climate Inventory,” National School Climate Center, http://www.schoolclimate.org/programs/csci.php. 27 Sandy, S.V., Jonathan Cohen, and M.B. Fisher, “Understanding and Assessing School Climate: Development and Validation of the Comprehensive School Climate Inventory (CSCI),” Unpublished manuscript, National School Climate Center, 2007; Ann Higgins-D’Alessandro, D. Faster, and Jonathan Cohen, School Growth and Change: A Report Comparing Schools in 2007 and 2010, Fordham University and the National School Climate Center; Ping Guo, Josephine Choe, and Ann Higgins-D’Alessandro, “Report of Construct Validity and Internal Con24

School Climate Assessment

175

The American Institutes for Research Conditions for Learning Survey (CLS) is a survey for students that measures the safety and respect elements of school climate, as well as the levels of student support and social and emotional learning.28 Research of the CLS by the American Institutes for Research indicated that the survey is a useful way to ascertain how students feel about their safety at school and whether or not they are treated with respect.29 Additional studies tested the reliability and validity of the survey and found it to have a strong correlation with safety and respect.30 The Center for Research in Educational Policy Tennessee School Climate Inventory (TSCI) measures the learning environment, parent and community involvement in the school, expectations of students, and collaboration between school administrators, faculty, and students.31 It is given to teachers, administrators, and other professional staff. There are no sections for students. Studies of the TSCI show consistent congruence between and among participants in the survey, but the absence of student input creates a vacuum for understanding the full school climate dynamics in a school. Studies on validity and reliability of the TSCI have been positive.32

sistency Findings for the Comprehensive School Climate Inventory,” Fordham University, 2011, https://www.schoolclimate.org/climate/documents/Fordham_Univ_CSCI_develop ment_review_2011.pdf. 28 Conditions for Learning Survey. (2012). American Institutes for Research. 29 2007 Student Connection Survey, Sample Score Report. American Institutes for Research, 2007. 30 David Osher, Kimberly Kendziora, and Marjorie Chinen, Student Connection Research: Final Narrative Report to the Spencer Foundation. Washington, D.C., 2008, http://www.air.org/sites/default/files/downloads/report/Spencer_final_report_3_31 _08_0.pdf; David Osher, American Institutes for Research’s 2007 Conditions for Learning Survey, Unpublished memo, American Institutes for Research, 2011; Ibid. 31 Tennessee School Climate Inventory, Center for Research in Education Policy, 1991. 32 E.D. Butler and M.J. Alborg, Tennessee School Climate Inventory: A Resource Manual (Memphis: Center for Research in Education Policy, 1991); L. A. Franceschini III, Convergent Validity Study of the School Climate Inventory (SCI) Using Archived Tennessee Department of Education Indicators (Memphis: Center for Research in Educational Policy, 2009).

176

Chapter Eleven

A survey for students that measures community risk factors that may impact school climate is the Communities That Care Youth Survey.33 The survey also measures school protective and risk factors such as academic failure, low commitment to school; opportunities for pro-social involvement; peer risk factors; drug use, and many other youth-related factors that help determine school and community climate influence. This can be an effective tool for school and community improvement when collaboration efforts are formulated to identify strategies for both school and communities. Studies have shown a correlation between the community and school factors that may interact to influence student perceptions of school climate and the risk factors associated with school climate. It can be a diagnostic tool and a program/strategy evaluation tool, as well. Several studies confirm its validity and reliability.34 The Consortium on Chicago School Research Survey (CSRS) of Chicago Public Schools was designed for student and staff participation and measures perceptions about academic engagement; academic press; peer support; teacher personal attention; student sense of belonging; safety; discipline actions; student-teacher relationship; trust; student responsibility; disorder and crime; teacher-parent interaction; and leadership.35 Although the CSRS was specifically designed for the Chicago Public School 33

James D. Hawkins and Richard Catalano, Communities That Care Youth Survey, University of Washington Social Development Research Group, 2010. 34 J. H. Williams, C. D. Ayers, and M. W. Arthur, “Risk and Protective Factors in the Development of Delinquency and Conduct Disorder,” in M. W. Fraser (Ed.), Risk and Resilience in Childhood: an Ecological Perspective, 1997, 140-170; Abigail Fagan, M. Lee Van Horn, J. David Hawkins, and Michael Arthur, “Using Community and Family Risk and Protective Factors for Community-Based Prevention Planning,” Journal of Community Psychology, 35, no. 4 (2007): 535-555, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/J_Hawkins/publication/227721372_Using_co mmunity_and_family_risk_and_protective_factors_for_communitybased_prevention_pla nning/links/0c960518c5e903c836000000.pdf; Susan D. Calkins, Psychobiological Models of Adolescent Risk: Implications for Prevention and Intervention, Developmental Psychobiology, 52, (2009): 213-215, http://www.reclaimingfutures.org/sites/blog.reclaimingfutures.org/files/userfiles/C alkins.Psychobiological-Models-of-Adolescent-Risk.pdf; Michael W. Arthur, The Communities That Care Youth Survey: Additional Information for Checklist Criteria, Unpublished memo referenced in Safe Supportive Learning–American Institutes for Research, 2011. 35 Consortium on Chicago School Research Survey of Chicago Public Schools, The University of Chicago, 2000.

School Climate Assessment

177

District, it contains many school climate components that could be used in multiple school settings as a means of identifying elements that may be negatively influencing school climate. A validation study of the CSRS showed it is a useful instrument for studying school climate.36 The Culture of Excellence and Ethics Assessment (CEEA) is a survey for students, faculty/staff, and parents.37 The survey measures school culture, student safety, faculty support and the engagement of students, leadership practices, faculty beliefs and behaviors, home-school communication and support, parent engagement in schools, and ethics. The CEEA is an effective instrument to determine the level of interaction between teachers, administrators, parents, and students and to identify areas of concern that could be addressed in strategic planning.38 A survey that focuses on school climate connectedness is the Perceived School Experiences Scale.39 This survey is for students and measures academic motivation, academic pressure, and school connectedness. The Perceived School Experience Scale is a simple survey to complete and provides the elements necessary to compare school connectedness with academic motivation. Research points out the critical importance of connectedness to students’ perceptions of safety, engagement, and self-confidence and the correlation with overall school climate (see the chapter on School Climate and Connectedness). Research on the Perceived School Experience Scale supports its validity and reliability.40

36

N. Montgomery, CCSR 5 Essentials Survey–2007 Scoring Sample. Unpublished memo referenced in Safe Supportive Learning–American Institutes for Research, 2010. 37 Culture of Excellence and Ethics Assessment, (New York: Manlius, Institute for Excellence and Ethics). 38 Vladimir T. Khmelkov and Matthew L. Davidson, Culture of Ethics and Excellence Assessment Student and Faculty/Staff Survey Psychometric Data: High School Sample (New York: Manlius, Institute for Excellence and Ethics, 2011); Vladimir T. Khmelkov, Matthew L. Davidson, Kyle Baker, Tom Lickona, and Rich Parisi, Survey Components and Scale Matrix (New York: Manlius, Institute for Excellence and Ethics, 2011), http://www.excellenceandethics.com/assess/CEEA_v4.5_matrix.pdf. 39 D. Anderson-Butcher, A. Amorose, A. Iachini, and A. Ball, “The Development of the Perceived Schools Experiences Scale,” (2011) unpublished, safesupportivelearning.ed.gov/survey/perceived-school-experiences-scale. 40 Dawn Anderson-Butcher, Anthony Amrose, Aidyn Iachini, and Annahita Ball, “The Development of the Perceived School Experiences Scale,” Research on Social Work Practice, 22, no. 2 (2011): 186-194. doi:10.1177/1049731511419866.

178

Chapter Eleven

A comprehensive survey that provides information about the perception of students and staff is the Search Institute Creating a Great Place to Learn Survey (GPLS), which asks students questions about caring and fair staff; parental support and academic values; student voice (communications from and to students); safety; classroom order; peer academic influence; academic expectations; active learning; sense of belonging; motivation; staff-student relationship; staff collective efficacy; school-community relations; fairness and consistency of policies and practices; and resource adequacy.41 Internal studies of the GPLS by the Search Institute confirm validity and reliability and a 2011 study by Scales replicated the study of validity and reliability.42 The survey is an excellent means of determining how much support students think they are receiving from the school and from their parents. A school climate survey for high schools that includes the school discipline environment along with student interactions, learning environment, and the attitudes of students and staff is the Secondary Classroom Climate Assessment Instrument (SCCAI).43 The SCCAI seems to be an effective instrument to use to determine if there is a correlation between school climate of high schools and student academic outcomes, as well as studying the importance of attitudes and student academic outcomes. The SCCAI has been the subject of positive reliability and validity studies.44 Another secondary school survey is the Secondary School Climate Assessment Instrument that is used to measure the physical appearance of the school; student interactions; student discipline; learning and assessment; attitude and culture; faculty and student relations; leadership commitment and decision-making; and community relations. There are many attractive and useful components of the survey that are not included in most school climate surveys, such as the physical condition of the school, the commitment of leadership and the relationship between the school and the community. This survey is for students, faculty/staff, and parents.

41

Creating a Great Place to Learn Survey (Minneapolis: A Survey of School Climate-Search Institute, 2006). 42 Ibid.; P. S. Scales, “Preparation of Dataset for Analysis” Unpublished memo referenced in Safe Supportive Learning, American Institutes for Research, 2011. 43 Secondary Classroom Climate Assessment Instrument (Los Angeles: Alliance for the Study of School Climate, Charter College of Education, California State University, 2004). 44 Shindler, Jones, Williams, Taylor, and Cadenas, “Exploring the School ClimateStudent Achievement Connection.”

School Climate Assessment

179

A school climate survey that focuses on social competency as a measure of student-to-student relationships as well as student-to-teacher relationships in the social emotional domain is the Flourishing Children Survey of Social Competence. It is designed for students ages 12 to 18 and for parents of students ages 12 to 18. Research shows the importance of relationships in the school setting on how students feel about school climate and their prospects for success, as well as their self-confidence and selfesteem. This is a good survey to measure that relationship in a prescriptive manner. The survey’s validity and reliability as well as its usefulness in determining the health of relationships in school were studied by Moore and Lippman; Lippman et al.; Lippman, Guzman, and Moore; and Ryberg and Lippman.45 These studies supported the reliability and validity of the survey, as well as the relationships construct. The Abbreviated School Climate Survey–Student Version was designed to explore the student perspective of school climate as an indicator of student outcomes based on seven variables.46 A study of the Abbreviated School Climate Survey found a strong correlation of school climate factors–both organizational and social emotional–on student outcomes. Schools and school districts could use this instrument to measure the effect of school climate factors on student outcomes, including academic, social and economic aspects, according to Ding, Liu, and Berkowitz.47 The Tripod Project developed the Tripod Surveys over a 10-year period led by Ronald Ferguson at Harvard University.48 The Tripod Surveys 45

K. A. Moore and L. Lippman, Flourishing Children Survey of Social Competence (Bethesda: Child Trends, 2011), https://safesupportivelearning.ed.gov/survey/flourishing-children-survey-socialcompetence; L. Lippman, A. Moore, K. Guzman, L. Ryberg, H. McIntosh, S. Caal, M. Ramos, A. Carle, and M. Kuhfeld, Flourishing Children: Defining and Testing Indicators of Positive Development (New York: Springer Publications, 2013); L. Lippman, L. Guzman, and K.A. Moore, Measuring Flourishing Among Youth: Findings from the Flourishing Children Positive Indicators Project (Washington, DC: Child Trends, 2012); L. Lippman, K. Anderson-Moore, L. Guzman, R. Ryberg, H. McIntosh, M. Ramos, S. Caal, A. Carle, and M. Kuhfeld, Flourishing Children: Defining and Testing Indicators of Positive Development (Springer Publishing, 2014). 46 Cody Ding, Ying Liu, and Marvin Berkowitz, “The Study of Factor Structure and Reliability of an Abbreviated School Climate Survey,” Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 26, no. 3 (2011): 241-256. doi:10.1177/0829573511414005. 47 Ibid. 48 Ron F. Ferguson, The TRIPOD Project Framework (Cambridge: Harvard University, 2008).

180

Chapter Eleven

include elements of school climate: teacher effectiveness, student engagement, student satisfaction, and whole-school climate. The Tripod Surveys have been used in several schools, and received an endorsement from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in 2013 when it was validated in a “Measures of Effective Teaching” project. The Organizational Climate Descriptive Questionnaire measures the behavior and attitude of principals (supportive, directive, or restrictive) and the behavior and attitudes of teachers (collegial, intimate, or disengaged). 49 Studies confirmed validity and reliability. 50 The questionnaire can be a useful tool as a companion to other school climate ratings that include student perceptions. It may also prove beneficial as a means of matching leadership attitudes with teacher attitudes. Of several instruments used for assessing school climate, Moos’ Work Environment Scale (WES) has considerable potential for use with teachers despite the fact that it was designed initially for non-school workplaces.51 Its ten dimensions of involvement, which are peer cohesion, staff support, autonomy, task orientation, work pressure, clarity, control, innovation, and physical comfort seem wellͲsuited for describing the salient features of teachers’ work environment in order to determine which factors may be negatively or positively influencing the effectiveness of teachers and their interactions with students, as well as their self-efficacy.52 This could be very useful information when studying teacher retention elements related to school climate. One school climate measure that focuses directly on relationships in the multicultural context is a Racial Climate Survey (RCS).53 Using a RCS (locally developed high school version) data were gathered from 382 African-American and 1,456 European-American students regarding their perceptions of racial climate and it was determined that the RCS is an effec49

Wayne K. Hoy, The Organizational Climate Description for Elementary Schools (Ohio State University, Department of Education, 1972). 50 Wayne K. Hoy, John C. Tarter, and Robert B. Kottkamp, Open Schools/Healthy Schools (Newbury Park: Sage Publications, 1991). 51 Robert H. Moos, Work Environment Scale (Sunnyvale: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1987). 52 Barry J. Fraser, John G. Docker, and Darrell L Fisher, “Assessing and Improving School Climate,” Evaluation and Research in Education, 2, no. 3 (1988): 109-122. doi:10.1080/09500798809533248. 53 Erica Mattison and Mark S. Aber, “Closing the Achievement Gap: The Association of Racial Climate with Achievement and Behavioral Outcomes,” American Journal of Community Psychology, Volume 40 (2007): 1-12.

School Climate Assessment

181

tive means of examining the relationship between perceptions of school climate and student outcomes, such as student achievement and student discipline.54 As schools and states begin to use school climate surveys it is appropriate to ask what school climate surveys actually measure. Do they measure school climate at the classroom level or at the school level or both? When students and teachers respond to a survey are their responses based on the classrooms or the school overall or both? Are the surveys of students and teachers measuring the same things? In a study of the School Climate Scale, the researcher found that this widely used survey of elements of school climate measures it primarily at the school level and less at the classroom level, stating that, The School Climate Scale is found to have a stable and identical factor structure both within and between schools, ratings by different respondent groups are found to be moderately correlated, and average school climate within each school is found to predict a statistically significant amount of the between-school variation in children’s academic achievement and cognitive functioning. Differences between individual raters within each school are not found to have a meaningful relationship to child outcomes. It is concluded that the School Climate Survey is a valid and useful measure of school climate and the school-level theory is found to have the strongest support.55

In a study that also addressed these questions, it was found that among a group of 90 teachers and data from 1,881 fifth graders, teachers’ perception of school climate focused more on the classroom climate, while the students’ perception of school climate was more at the school level.56 Apparently, this stems from the daily routine of each. Teachers are for the most part confined to a classroom much of the school day, while students move from class to class and have the experience of observing the school from more than one classroom, as well as in multiple hallways, restrooms, the media center, cafeteria, playground, gym, etc. As suggested by Mitchell, Bradshaw, and Leaf in their study, schools should consider using surveys of students and teachers, and not just a student or teacher survey, and 54

Mattison and Aber, “Closing the Achievement Gap,” 1-12. E.A. Kelly, J.A. Glover, J.W. Keefe, C. Halderson, C. Sorenson, and C. Speth, School Climate Scale (Modified) (Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals, 1986). 56 Mitchell, Bradshaw, and Leaf, “Student and Teacher Perceptions of School Climate,” 271-279. 55

182

Chapter Eleven

while congruence between student and teachers survey results may be important at some level, it may also provide inaccurate information if viewed strictly as a means of validation because of the different perspectives of each. The question then needs to be asked: Does the congruence indicate validity or a lack thereof or are teachers and students revealing different but critically important pieces of information about the school from different perspectives? This perspective points to another element regarding the measuring of school climate. School districts and states should consider including multiple data sources when assessing school climate, where student, staff, and parent surveys are all only part of the overall metric collection of data to measure the health of a school’s climate. For example, the Georgia School Climate Star Rating system is based on student, parent, and staff surveys, plus student discipline data, student and staff attendance data, and student survey data at the micro-level where those questions on the survey that are linked directly to safety are analyzed, with each of the four data metric dimensions equally weighted. 57 This 4-tiered level of school climate measures broadens the collection of data elements in order to provide a more comprehensive view of school climate, including perception (survey) and actions (discipline and attendance). Additional studies support the use of multiple measures. For example, Brand, Felner, Shim, Seitsinger, and Dumas found that the determination of the quality of school climate can be informative if it includes three dimensions: a school-level assessment of climate, cultural pluralism measures, and school safety measures.58 After studying measures of over 100,000 students the researchers concluded that, “The relationship between climate ratings and students’ adjustment was examined in three increasingly large samples of schools and students that were collected during successive years of this project. Ratings of multiple climate dimensions were associated and related.”59 Zullig, Huebner, and Patton found that adding school satisfaction to the other school climate domains added more texture to the assessment of 57

Georgia Student Health Survey 2.0, Georgia Department of Education, www.gadoe.org/curriculum-instruction-and-assessment/curriculum-andinstruction/GSHS-II/pages/Georgia-Student-Health-Survey-II.aspx. 58 Stephen Brand, Robert Felner, Minsuk Shim, Anne Seitsinger, and Thaddeus Dumas, “Middle School Improvement and Reform: Development and Validation of a School-Level Assessment of Climate, Cultural Pluralism, and School Safety,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, no. 3 (2003): 570-588. 59 Ibid.

School Climate Assessment

183

school climate overall.60 The researchers examined the surveys of 2,049 middle and high school students and found that most of the school climate domains measured (academic support, positive student-teacher relationships, school connectedness, order and discipline and academic satisfaction) related significantly to school satisfaction as a separate but related measure. The researchers concluded that, “The inclusion of school climate and school satisfaction measures may form a foundation for more comprehensive assessments for understanding and monitoring the experiences of students in schools.”61 The confluence of research on school climate strongly suggests that schools, districts or states should develop school climate surveys that seek input from students, teachers (school personnel), and parents. Relying on one set of respondents may offer a limited understanding of a school’s climate. Additionally, the measures of school climate should include other variables, such as student discipline data and student achievement, so schools will have both data and survey results to formulate a picture and deeper understanding of a school’s climate. This information could have the further advantage of being viewed prescriptively, allowing schools to identify specific areas of concerns in order to direct strategies or practices to address those issues.

Chapter Eleven: Assessment of School Climate Summary Points The assessment of school and classroom climates has become an important component of school climate research and school improvement strategies. School climate surveys and other types of instruments vary in many ways, but most of them focus on at least one or more of the four important school climate elements of relationships, institutional environment, teaching and learning, and safety. Many school climate surveys are structured inventories that ask the respondent to react to a statement describing a specific element of school climate such as, “I have been picked on during the last 30 days.” 60

Keith J. Zullig, E. Scott Huebner, and Jon M. Patton, “Relationships Among School Climate Domains and School Satisfaction,” Psychology in the Schools, 48, no. 2 (2011): 133-145. doi:10.1002/pits.20532. 61 Ibid.

184

Chapter Eleven

Some surveys are constructed to allow for congruency measures, to ascertain the level of agreement on responses between and among students, parents, and teachers. Teacher ratings are more sensitive to classroom-level factors, such as poor classroom management and a proportion of students with disruptive behaviors, whereas student ratings are more influenced by schoollevel factors such as student mobility, student-teacher relationships, and principal turnover. Teachers are more confined to a classroom much of the school day, while students move from class to class and have the experience of observing the school from more than one classroom, as well as in multiple hallways, restrooms, the media center, cafeteria, playground, gym, etc. Congruence or a lack of it on responses to surveys between and among students, teachers, and parents should be viewed carefully, because the frame of reference measured may be different for each of the groups. Students and parents have the highest levels of congruency about school climate when there is a positive perception of school climate. The congruency starts breaking down when survey results move toward a negative perception on either the parent side or student side. Schools having more racially and ethnically diverse student populations and more newcomers to the school show significantly less student and parent consensus regarding the school environment. A growing number of school climate surveys are intended to explore the relationship between school climate and student academic outcomes. Schools with positive school climate ratings have higher student achievement outcome ratings. Student performance is higher and suspension rates are lower in schools with a positive school climate. There is a correlation between the community and school factors that may interact to influence student perceptions of school climate and the risk factors associated with school climate. As schools and states begin to use school climate surveys, it is appropriate to ask what school climate surveys actually measure and identify the purpose of the survey as well as the use of the survey results. School districts and states should consider including multiple data sources in measuring school climate, where student, staff, and parent surveys are a part of the overall metric collection of data to measure the health of a school’s climate.

School Climate Assessment

185

School climate-related surveys/instruments: Finlayson School Climate Questionnaires; Quality of School Life; Georgia Student Health Survey; Georgia Brief School Climate Inventory; California School Climate, Health, and Learning Survey; Youth Risk Behavior Survey and Safe Communities Safe Schools Climate Survey; Alaska School Climate and Connectedness Survey; Delaware School Climate Survey; Delaware School Climate Survey–Home Edition; Comprehensive School Climate Inventory; Conditions for Learning Survey; Educational Policy School Climate Inventory; Communities That Care Youth Survey; Consortium on Chicago School Research Survey; Culture of Excellence and Ethics Assessment; Perceived School Experience Scale; Search Institute Creating a Great Place to Learn Survey; Secondary Classroom Climate Assessment Instrument; Secondary School Climate Assessment Instrument; Flourishing Children Survey of Social Competence; Abbreviated School Climate Survey–Student Version; Racial Climate Survey; Tripod Surveys; Organizational Climate Descriptive Questionnaire; Moos Work Environment Scale; School Climate Survey.

CHAPTER TWELVE SCHOOL CLIMATE AND RACIAL AND ETHNIC CLIMATE

“In a positive school climate opportunities abound for students to interact in a socially comfortable environment that perpetuates a sense of belonging for all students.” —C. Byrd1

The study of school climate includes many dimensions, because the behavior of humans as well as the dynamics of human interactions is complicated and multi-faceted. School climate discussions should also span issues that must be addressed to ensure that efforts to improve school climate are intended to benefit all students and staff members. Racial and ethnic dynamics in the school setting are important to understand and examine in the context of school climate and not solely within the context of how minority students view school climate. School climate is equally important as a possible factor in student discipline disproportionality and better understanding it. A study with 400 middle school students who completed a school climate survey yielded useful results for administrators to understand multiple levels of school climate.2 The researchers found that African-American students were more likely than Caucasian students to report peers’ aggressive behavior, but were less likely to express willingness to seek help from their teachers for bullying and threats of violence in schools with a negative school climate. Additionally, African-American students were re1

Christy M. Byrd, “Measurement of Racial/Ethnic Identity in Children: A Critical Review,” Journal of Black Psychology, 38 (2011): 3-31. doi:10.1177/0095798410397544. 2 Erica L.M. Shirley and Dewey G. Cornell, “The Contribution of Student Perceptions of School Climate to Understanding the Disproportionate Punishment of African-American Students in a Middle School,” School Psychology International, 33, no. 2 (2012): 115-134. doi:10.1177/0143034311406815.

School Climate and Racial and Ethnic Climate

187

ferred to the administrative offices three times as frequently and received five times as many out-of-school suspensions as Caucasians. According to the researchers, school climate differences accounted for some of the differences in student discipline referrals and administratively imposed consequences. The researchers suggested further research to explore if African-American students’ reluctance to seek the assistance from teachers in matters related to bullying and threats of violence was a function of certain elements of school climate, such as relationships, or other factors, and if disproportional consequences were the result of discipline misapplied or were in fact related to school climate factors such as weak relationships and little connectedness. Disproportionality was the subject of a study by Skiba et al. where the researchers compared student discipline infractions, student, and school characteristics to the rates of racial disparities in out-of-school suspension and expulsion.3 The study found that Type of infraction; race, gender, and to a certain extent socioeconomic status at the individual level; and, at the school level, mean school achievement, percentage of Black enrollment, and principal perspectives all contributed to the probability of out-of-school suspension or expulsion. For racial disparities, however, school-level variables, including principal perspectives on discipline, appear to be among the strongest predictors. Such a pattern suggests that schools and districts looking to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in discipline would do well to focus on school- and classroom-based interventions.4

This is a strong statement on the importance of the elements that define school climate: safety, relationships, connectedness, teacher effectiveness, and institutional environment. Students of all races and ethnic groups must feel safe and in some way connected to the school such as participating in clubs, events, activities, team sports, etc. The relationship between students and teachers is critically important for all students, but especially for students who do not feel like they belong in the school because of social emotional or racial/ethnic reasons. The relationship between teachers and 3

Russell J. Skiba, Robert H. Horner, Choong-Geun Chung, M. Karega Rausch, Seth L. May, and Tary Tobin, “Race Is Not Neutral: A National Investigation of African-American and Latino Disproportionality in School Discipline,” School Psychology Review, 40, no. 1 (2011): 85-107, http://www.indiana.edu/~atlantic/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Skiba-et-al.-Raceis-not-neutral..pdf. 4 Ibid.

188

Chapter Twelve

students affects teacher effectiveness, also, because of the perception of teachers about student efforts and attitude. Mattison and Aber looked at the association of school climate regarding racial issues with student achievement and behavioral outcomes by investigating the relationship between school racial climate and student self-reports of academic and discipline outcomes.5 One of the important components of school climate is the relationship between and among races and ethnic groups. School climate measures that focus directly on this relationship are racial climate surveys.6 Using a racial climate survey, Byrd opined that school racial climate is a multi-dimensional construct involving at least two essential components of school climate: interpersonal interactions and school socialization, only she added that the school socialization in integrated schools is school racial socialization.7 Byrd and others recognized the importance of school racial climate, but there is dearth of information on “how the school racial climate is important.” In Byrd’s study of 99 African-American middle and high school students who completed a racial climate survey that included perceptions of a sense of belonging, social and academic competence, and intrinsic motivation, she found that Perceptions of more positive cross-race interactions were associated with greater belonging, and perceptions of colorblind messages were associated with lower competence. Overall, the study demonstrated the utility of a multidimensional approach to school racial climate and supported existing research on the importance of school climate for adolescents’ motivation.8

A positive school climate creates conditions of safety and security, but also of connectivity and relationships, which are essential elements of a positive school climate, including school racial climate. In a positive school climate, opportunities abound for students to interact in a socially comfortable environment that then perpetuates a sense of belonging for all students - majority and minority students - which is linked to positive attitudes and successful student academic outcomes. That is why it is im5

Mattison and Aber, “Closing the Achievement Gap,” 1-12. For information on racial climate surveys see Erica Mattison and Mark S. Aber, “Closing the Achievement Gap: The Association of Racial Climate with Achievement and Behavioral Outcomes,” American Journal of Community Psychology, Volume 40 (2007): 1-12. 7 Byrd, The Measurement of Racial/Ethnic Identity in Children,” 3-31. 8 Ibid. 6

School Climate and Racial and Ethnic Climate

189

portant for schools to consider racial and ethnic relationships within school climates. Using Critical Race Theory and the Ecological Model of Human Development as the theoretical bases for the study, Martin looked for markers that were predictive of African-American success in elementary school.9 According to the researcher, “The findings of this study revealed that the following features can promote resiliency in African-American males and assist in their overall success [in school]: consistency; expectations; student and teacher relationships; and a positive school climate.”10 Students observe and notice inconsistencies in how they are treated and what is expected of them and that inconsistency erodes trust, which has a disabling effect on student and teacher relationships. A positive school climate can boost trust-building interactions between students and teachers. School climate applies to all races and cultures. A study of 280 Asian and Hispanic youth examined the influence of students’ opinions of school climate in regards to the perception that the school supported multiculturalism and the resulting impact on student academic achievement. 11 The researchers found that, On the whole, these findings suggest that fostering a school climate supportive of multiculturalism may improve empathy toward ethnic outgroups. Furthermore, schools that promote compassion and tolerance for diverse ethnic groups may achieve better academic outcomes among Hispanic youth.12

In a positive school climate there are no ethnic out-groups, or at least there is a diminished possibility of excluded ethnic out-groups or subcultures. A positive school climate creates conditions where students get to 9

Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic, Cultural Race Theory: An Introduction (NYU Press, 2001); U. Bronfenbrenner, “Ecological Models of Human Development,” In International Encyclopedia of Education, Volume 3, 2nd Edition (Oxford Press, 1994); Beverly Ann Martin, “An Exploration into the Effects of School Discipline Policies on the Academic Performance of African-American Male Students” (dissertation, California State University, 2014) http://cdmweb.lib.csufresno.edu/cdm/ref/collection/thes/id/125009. 10 Ibid. 11 Janet Chang and Thao N. Le, “Multiculturalism as a Dimension of School Climate: The Impact on the Academic Achievement of Asian American and Hispanic Youth,” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16, no. 4 (2010): 485492. doi:10.1037/a0020654. 12 Ibid.

190

Chapter Twelve

know each other by interacting–known in research as “contact,” using Allport’s term.13 Gordon Allport’s “Contact Hypothesis” stated that interpersonal contact is one of the most effective ways to reduce prejudice between majority and minority groups.14 Pettigrew and Tropp examined that hypothesis based on a meta-analysis of over 500 studies.15 They found that contact is primarily what is needed for greater understanding between virtually all groups, except in the most hostile or threatening conditions when control and order have been lost. The contact is effective, Pettigrew and Tropp state, not only cognitively learning about each other, but also emotionally sharing likes, dislikes, fears, etc. Minority students who have opportunities to communicate with other students in conditions that encourage interactions, connectedness, and engagement benefit from a positive school climate, and there is a reason why. According to Griffith schools with more racially and ethnically diverse student populations show significantly less satisfaction with the school environment.16 School climates that are negative, unsafe, distrustful, unclean, and non-responsive prevent students and groups of students from interacting with one another and with teachers, which, when coupled with a tense or unresponsive racial/ethnic climate, create conditions of unrest and unproductive academic outcomes, as well as disproportionate student discipline practices and consequences.

Chapter Twelve: School Climate and Racial and Ethnic Summary Points The study of school climate includes many dimensions, because the behavior of humans as well as the dynamics of human interactions is complicated and multi-faceted. Racial and ethnic dynamics in the school setting are important to understand and examine. The presence of disproportionality where minority students are overrepresented in student discipline consequences has been and con13

Gordon W. Allport conceptualized the contact hypothesis which states that interpersonal contact is one of the most effective ways to reduce prejudice between and among groups of people, particularly within majority and minority groups. 14 Gordon W. Allport, The Nature of Prejudice (Cambridge: Perseus Books, 1954). 15 Thomas F. Pettigrew and Linda R. Tropp, “A Meta-Analytic Test of Intergroup Contact Theory,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, no. 5 (2006): 751-783. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751. 16 Griffith, “School Climate as Group Evaluation,” 35-61.

School Climate and Racial and Ethnic Climate











191

tinues to be a challenge for many schools and school districts across the nation. School climate may be an essential element in better understanding the dynamic nature of disproportionality. African-American students are less likely to express willingness to seek help from their teachers for bullying and threats of violence in schools with a negative school climate. For racial disparities school-level variables including principal perspectives on discipline are among the strongest predictors of disproportionate administration of student discipline consequences. Students of all races and ethnic groups must feel safe and in some way be connected to the school such as participating in clubs, events, activities, team sports, etc. The relationship between students and teachers is critically important for all students, but especially for students who do not feel like they belong in the school because of social emotional reasons or because they are minorities and/or are new to the school. Positive perceptions of school racial climate are associated with higher student achievement and fewer discipline problems. Careful attention should be given to the racial climate of high schools within the broader context of school climate. School racial climate is a multi-dimensional construct involving at least two essential components of school climate: interpersonal interactions and school socialization. In a positive school climate, opportunities abound for students to interact in a socially comfortable environment that then perpetuates a sense of belonging, which is linked to successful student academic outcomes. Elements that can promote resiliency in African-American males and assist in their overall success in school: consistency; expectations; student and teacher relationships; and a positive school climate. School climate applies to all races and cultures. Fostering a school climate supportive of multiculturalism may improve empathy toward ethnic minority groups. A positive school climate creates conditions where students get to know one another by interacting or through “contact.” According to Contact Hypothesis, interpersonal contact is one of the most effective ways to reduce prejudice between majority and minority groups.

192

Chapter Twelve

An unresponsive and negative racial/ethnic school climate creates conditions that impede student achievement and exacerbate disproportionate student discipline practices and consequences.

CHAPTER THIRTEEN SCHOOL CLIMATE AND POPULATION-BASED EFFECTS

“Recognizing that creating a school culture and climate that genuinely engages and supports all students is essential to increasing student achievement and preventing students from dropping out.” —M. Elias1

Population-based studies of a defined population assist in evaluating effects that are not necessarily unique to that population, but that may carry additional effects or prolonged effects and can offer insight to facets that may be detrimental to successful school performance. Population-based effects can be referenced to describe the ubiquitous nature of school climate and how it interacts with individuals and groups of students. At the pyramid of intervention level of universal screening and impact, school climate and frameworks such as Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports that are aimed at improving the conditions for learning are considered the foundation for building and maintaining a positive school climate.2 The pyramid of intervention at the levels beyond the universal level does not necessarily represent a shift from population-based interventions to targeted individual interventions. At each level of the pyramid of intervention is another population of students who are impacted more deeply by school climate and it is important to note that when a school becomes more caring and safer, and encourages positive relationships, creates engagement opportunities, and promotes connectedness, the school becomes a “System of Care” facility. A System of Care environment more often and more accurately identifies students in distress and consequently expects support services for those students. It is important to consider the various elements of research on populations of students that fall beyond the base level of the pyramid of interven1 2

Elias, School Climate that Promotes Student Voice, 22-27. https://www.pbis.org/.

194

Chapter Thirteen

tion. It is important to include this research in order to fully understand the effect of school climate across all sets of students.

Dropping Out of School and the Role of School Climate The National Dropout Prevention Center reports that over 7,000 students drop out of school every day in the United States.3 That is 1.2 million per year or one every 26 seconds. According to a report by Sum, Harrington, and Khatiwada, the employment rates of the nation’s young high school dropouts varied across gender, race, ethnicity, and household income groups with African-American student dropouts the least likely to be employed followed by Asians, Whites, and Hispanics. 4 According to the United States Labor Department, the dropout jobless rate for AfricanAmerican students is 69 percent, Asians 57 percent, Whites 54 percent, and Hispanics 47 percent.5 Furthermore, the findings revealed that only 60 percent of the nation’s 16-24 year old dropouts worked at some point during the year. Research has emerged that matches factors of school climate with components associated with the causes of dropping out of high school. Changing school climate could be an effective dropout prevention strategy. Ruus et al. conducted a study to examine the effects of school climate on the decision to drop out of school.6 A student survey was administered to 3,838 students in grades 7, 9, and 12 in 65 schools. The results of the study indicated that critical factors of school climate are related to conditions that lead to students dropping out of school. The most important school climate components were the relationship, or lack of it, between the students and teachers and the connectedness with other students. Another element of school climate that was related to dropping out was a school’s value system, which seemed to be related to students’ optimism or pessimism about life and their related degree of psychological and physiologi3

National Dropout Prevention Center. (2013). Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina. http://dropoutprevention.org/. 4 Andrew Sum, Paul Harrington, and Ishwar Khatiwada, “The Impact of New Immigrants on Young Native-Born Workers” (blog) September 2006, http://cis.org/NewImmigrants-NativeBornWorkers. 5 United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Employment and Underemployment of Recent High School Graduates and Dropouts,” July 2015, www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2015/data-on-display/dod_q4.htm. 6 Ruus, Veisson, Leino, Ots, Pallas, Sarv, and Veisson, “Student’s Well-Being, Coping,” 919-936.

School Climate and Population-Based Effects

195

cal well-being, as well as prospects for academic success. Changing behavior cannot take place without changing relationships which are related to norms, values, culture and ultimately school climate. This study supported the findings of an earlier study that considered the effects of school climate on student disengagement and dropping out (Pellerin, 2000).7 In the Pellerin Study, the researcher used the High School Effectiveness Study with 168 schools and over 8,000 students. According to the researcher, For students who persisted to 12th grade, there were almost no race/ethnic differences in disengagement when 10th grade disengagement was controlled. Race differences in school effects disappeared after 10th grade, but only because more disengaged minority students disappeared from schools. There were significant differences among the race/ethnic groups in 10th grade disengagement levels. Higher socioeconomic status was associated with lower dropout rate, and it created significant white-minority gaps. Students did best in authoritative, positive climate schools and worst in neglecting schools.8

When students first feel the effects of disengagement, the idea of dropping out is planted, and this is more pronounced with minority students. To reduce drop out numbers, schools need to concentrate efforts to create a positive school climate where students feel engaged and connected–to believe that someone in the school cares enough to show it and express it and to encourage and allow students to participate in class and in school activities and events. Connecting relationships leads students to believe that people care about them, which increases the likelihood that they will stay in school. Giving students a “voice” in school was part of a research project that examined if and how school climate can promote student participation in school.9 Elias cites numerous articles “recognizing that creating a school culture and climate that genuinely engages and supports all students is essential to increasing students' achievement and preventing students from dropping out.” He found that powerful tools to reduce the number of students dropping out of school include the “combined…efforts to create a 7

Lisa A. Pellerin, “Urban Youth and Schooling: The Effect of School Climate on Student Disengagement and Dropout,” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, April 24, 2000, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED441883.pdf. 8 Ibid. 9 Elias, “School Climate that Promotes Student Voice,” 22-27.

196

Chapter Thirteen

safe, supporting, caring, and challenging school climate [that] explicitly promote students' social emotional and character development competencies [and] activities that enhance student voice and engagement.” Unless these efforts are made, according to the researcher, the academic and opportunity gaps that lead to students dropping out will continue to plague many schools. Croninger and Lee found that the school climate elements of engagement and interaction between students and teachers was so effective in reducing the dropout rate that it cut the dropout rate in half in some schools.10 According to a study by Cotton smaller schools are likely to have a more positive school climate than larger schools because of less truancy, better classroom order, fewer cases of vandalism and theft, infrequent substance abuse, little gang participation, and fewer dropouts.11 A study conducted in the Chicago school district by Wasley et al. found students attending small schools in Chicago’s poorest neighborhoods attended up to five more days per semester and dropped out at a third to half the rate of students in larger schools.12 The same students had a higher grade-point average and improved their reading scores by almost half a year–the improvement in reading skills reduced the dropout probability significantly. The academic success and reduced likelihood of dropping out of school was attributed primarily to a more positive school climate in the smaller schools. Despite the research many schools get larger every year, including the designs for new schools. There are high schools in many school districts with over 3,000 students. Perhaps the size of a school matters, but it seems to be most significant when school climate is not positive.

10

Robert G. Croninger and Valerie E. Lee, “Social Capital and Dropping Out of High School: Benefits to At-Risk Students of Teachers’ Support and Guidance,” Teachers College Record, 103, no. 4 (2001): 548–581. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0161-4681.00127. 11 Kathleen Cotton, “School Size, School Climate, and Student Performance,” Close-Up, No. 20, Series X (School Improvement Research Series, Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, 1996); Kathleen Cotton, New Small Learning Communities: Findings from Recent Literature (Portland: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, 2001). 12 Patricia Wasley, Michelle Fine, Matt Gladden, Nicole E. Holland, Sherry P. King, Esther Mosak, and Linda C. Powell, Small Schools: Great Strides. A Study of New Small Schools in Chicago (New York: The Bank Street College of Education, 2000), https://s3.amazonaws.com/bankstreet_web/media/filer_public/filer_public/2014/10 /29/small-schools-study.pdf.

School Climate and Population-Based Effects

197

Other components of school climate that may have an impact on students and the decision to drop out concern the segment of the student population identified as gifted students. The literature of research on this topic refers to the necessity of a “creative environment,” as defined by Sternberg and Grigorenko and Harrington, including the physical, social, and cultural environment in which creative thought and activity occur because the school climate and culture encourage both. 13 A study sponsored by the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented found that in schools that did not have a positive school climate, gifted students faced an environment that not only did not support their learning style, it crushed or discouraged their talents and increased the possibility of the gifted students later dropping out of school.14 Hennessey added, These findings are particularly relevant to gifted and talented classrooms or ‘pull-out’ programs where the potential for student creativity is especially high. The argument is made that particular attention must be paid to the impact of extrinsic constraints on the motivation and performance of gifted children coming from linguistically and culturally diverse backgrounds…[everyone] must work together to create an inclusive school and classroom atmosphere that will promote the development of creativity and an excitement about learning for all gifted students.15

Without a school climate that is positive and supports engagement, creativity, and various opportunities for them to explore and learn, Hennessey says many gifted students will and do drop out of school. Truancy is considered a precursor to dropping out.16 A study of the reasons for leaving school found that “missing too many days” was the

13

Robert J. Sternberg and Elena L. Grigorenko, “Are Cognitive Styles Still in Style?” American Psychologist, 52, no. 7 (1007): 700-712, http://www.beteronderwijsnederland.nl/files/sternberg%20grigrenko.pdf; David M. Harrington, “Conditions and Settings/Environment” in Encyclopedia of Creativity, Volume I, Ed. By Steven R. Pritzker (1999): 323-341. 14 Beth A. Hennessey, Developing Creativity Gifted Children: The Central Importance of Motivation and Classroom Climate (Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, 2004). 15 Ibid. 16 William Schwartz, New Information on Youth Who Drop Out: Why They Leave and What Happens to Them, http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED396006.pdf.

198

Chapter Thirteen

number one reason.17 In a study of truants, Sommer studied the effects of family variables, friendship patterns and interests, behavior and attitudes toward school, and academic ability and achievement.18 There were differences in all variables, but the ones that were most predictive of dropping out of school were boredom, teaching style, and several elements of school climate such as the lack of relationships, few opportunities for positive interaction with teachers and other students, and little chance of belonging and connectedness. These school climate factors are related to student attendance, and some of the primary reasons students are absent are tied to feeling unsafe, feeling insignificant, being bored, feeling unconnected, and feeling depressed, which can all be linked to the impact school climate can have on social emotional development. Many of the students who are suspended or expelled from school are transferred to alternative schools. There are many examples of alternative programs and schools. Some are based on instruction, such as school credit recovery and academic remediation, while others are simply a place for students to attend without much thought or planning given to the quality of the experience. Cotton found that the most influential component of school climate in alternative schools is the interpersonal relationship between the teachers and students.19 It is predictive of success or failure in alternative education settings, as well as predictive of whether or not students successfully return to their home school. Relationships and an overall positive school climate were found to be important in a study of alternative programs in three racially and economically diverse communities and schools. The researchers argued that the quality of alternative programs is related to school climate and the quality of the academic delivery.20 Alternative programs with a positive school 17

P. Rooney, W. Hussar, M. Planty, S. Choy, G. Hampden-Thompson, and M.A. Fox, The Condition of Education (Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Education NCES 2006-071, June 2006). 18 Barbara Sommer, “What’s Different about Truants? A Comparison Study of Eighth-Graders,” Journal of Adolescence, 14 (1985): 411-422, http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02138836#page-1. 19 Cotton, “School Size, School Climate, and Student Performance.” 20 Mary M. Quinn, Jeffrey M. Poirier, Susan E. Faller, Robert A. Gable, and Steven W. Tonelson, “An Examination of School Climate in Effective Alternative Programs,” Preventing School Failure, 51, no. 1 (2006): 11-17, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Gable/publication/254347223_An_Ex amination_of_School_Climate_in_Effective_Alternative_Programs/links/00b4953 b5a0aad8a55000000.pdf#page=11.

School Climate and Population-Based Effects

199

climate can support students and aid in their academic remediation and return to a regular school setting instead of dropping out of school.

Sexual Orientation and the Importance of School Climate Students’ sexual orientation is a group of students who are overrepresented in data as targets of bullying, and who are affected by a negative school climate to the extent that their lives at school and beyond can be influenced. According to a study by Wernick, Kulick, and Inglehart, transgender students are at a greater risk of bullying, harassment, negative mental health, and underperforming academic outcomes compared to the general population of students.21 They found that if peers are engaged in a healthy and positive school climate that encourages or at the very least allows students to interact more frequently, the biases against and the aggressiveness toward transgender students decline. In a 2014 study, Ullman examined same-sex attracted students’ perceptions of their school climate and their school-based environmental stresses using the Phenomenological Variant of Ecological Systems Theory model, which is a framework to examine strength and resiliency, especially during the process of identity formation in adolescents.22 The researchers found that, Same-sex attracted students' connection to teachers and their school environment had the strongest total impact on their academic self-concept and motivation to learn. Of key importance was the indirect impact of students' perceptions of their school climate on both of these important academic outcomes, through their connection to both their school community and general school environment.23

The findings highlight the profound effect a negative school climate can have on same-sex students as they struggle to find connectedness in schools. The issue of connecting with an adult at school was also a key 21

Laura J. Wernick, Alex Kulick, and M. H. Inglehart, “Influence of Peers, Teachers, and Climate on Students’ Willingness to Intervene When Witnessing AntiTransgender Harassment,” Journal of Adolescence, 37, no. 6 (2014): 927-935. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.06.008. 22 Jacqueline Ullman, “At-Risk or School-Based Risk?” 417-433; Urie Bronfenbrenner, The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1979). 23 Ibid.

200

Chapter Thirteen

component of a study that looked at the Youth Risk Behavior Survey of 8,910 students.24 The study found that, “Among those lesbian, gay, or bisexual students who lacked an adult connection at school…their odds of most negative outcomes were significantly higher than for heterosexual adolescents.” Those lesbian, gay, and bisexual students who lacked a significant adult connection in school as an essential component of a positive school climate had a 45 percent suicide ideation rate compared to half that number in the heterosexual population and a 31 percent suicide attempt rate compared to six percent in the majority sexual orientation groups. A positive school climate can be a protective factor for all students, but especially for students with minority sexual orientation.

School Climate and the Community and Home The effects school climate can have on the community and what effects the community can have on school climate and student outcomes have been explored by researchers. This interaction of school and climate can have a significant impact on students. In a study by Hopson, Schiller, and Lawson, the researchers studied data of 13,068 students in 43 schools and the adjacent communities to examine the effects of school climate and neighborhoods on student behavior and grades using an ecological theory model of risk and resilience.25 The findings suggest that when students receive support from both the neighborhoods and schools in the form of supportive adult relationships, their academic outcomes and behaviors are more positive. The researchers state that, “Students who report more support from neighbors have significantly better grades than those who report less support.” The findings suggest that there is a symbiotic relationship of school climate and community 24

Youth Risk Behavior Survey (Atlanta, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1990), http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/index.htm; Kacie S. Seil, Mayur M. Desai, and Megan V. Smith, “Sexual Orientation, Adult Connectedness, Substance Use, and Mental Health Outcomes Among Adolescents: Findings from the 2009 New York City Youth Risk Behavior Survey,” American Journal of Public Health, 104, no. 10, (2014): 1950-1956. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2014.302050. 25 Laura M. Hopson, Kathryn S. Schiller, and Hal A. Lawson, “Exploring Linkages Between School Climate, Behavioral Norms, Social Supports, and Academic Success,” Social Work Research, 38, no. 4 (2014): 197-209, doi:10.1093/swr/svu017; Mark W. Fraser, “Risk and Resilience in Childhood: An Ecological Perspective,” Paper presented at the National Association of School Social Workers Conference, Washington, D.C, 1997.

School Climate and Population-Based Effects

201

climate that can positively or negatively influence students. However, it is possible for a positive school climate to stand on its own as a protective factor for students. In a study that examined post-traumatic stress reactions to the exposure of students to violence in the community, the researchers found that schools can be a safe haven even within a violent community.26 A survey was given to 653 students in high school in four communities. The researchers discovered that students exposed to violence in the community suffered symptoms of post-traumatic stress. However, the results also showed that, Positive school climate moderated the relationship between violence and trauma, and was related to lower levels of post-traumatic stress symptoms. Among youth that had witnessed violence in the community, positive school climate was most strongly correlated with lower levels of posttraumatic stress symptoms at high levels of exposure.27

There is little doubt that communities can shape the circumstances, conditions, and climate of schools within the communities; however, schools can also create their own school climate, and when they do develop a positive school climate, all students benefit from it, but especially students who must cope with compelling issues such as complex trauma and post-traumatic stress symptoms. In a study conducted by the Georgia Department of Education, which controlled for variables such as low socioeconomic status and others variables outside of the school, it was found that school climate is determined as much by teachers and administrators as by outside factors like community conditions.28 According to the researchers, Factors outside of a school's control are not directly related to the development of school climate-other than sub-themes. Factors such as the percentage of students who are free/reduced lunch eligible or the proportion of students who are traditionally underrepresented did not have a strong rela26

Deborah A. O’Donnell, William C. Roberts, and Mary E. Schwab-Stone, “Community Violence Exposure and Post-Traumatic Stress Reactions among Gambian Youth: The Moderating Role of Parents and School,” Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 46, no. 1 (2011): 59-67. doi:10.1007/s00127-0090162-x. 27 Ibid. 28 McGiboney and Kramer, “The Relationship between School Climate and Student Achievement.”

202

Chapter Thirteen tionship with school climate. The teachers and administrators were a stronger factor as determinants of school climate.29

That is not to say that a violence-riddled community will not affect the local schools; of course, it can and does. However, many of the components of school climate such as the condition of the building, the development of relationships between students and staff, opportunities for students to engage in school activities, teaching effectiveness, leadership style, and a sense of feeling connected with the school are all within the control of the school–or can be. School climate as a possible protective factor was the point of a large study that tested the hypothesis that school climate counteracts students’ “home-school risk.” 30 The study examined the moderating effects of school climate and the relationship between family structure, which was defined as two-parent, one-parent, foster care, or homeless and academic outcomes (as measured by Grade Point Average). The study included 490,000 students in the ninth and eleventh grades from 902 public high schools. The researchers found that, Regardless of family structure, students with more positive school climate perceptions reported higher Grade Point Averages (GPAs). Youths with two-parent, one-parent, and homeless family structures displayed stepwise, linear improvements in self-reported GPA as perceptions of climate improved. Overall, the moderation effect of positive school climate perceptions on self-reported GPA was strongest for homeless youth and youth from one-parent homes, suggesting that school climate has a protective effect for students living in these family structures.31

It is significant that positive school climate can have moderating effects on students from various home situations and with various conditions and circumstances. Perhaps schools have more influence on students and their quality of life at school than previously thought. A positive school climate is one of the most important, if not essential keys, for the success 29

Ibid. Meagan O’Malley, Adam Voight, Tyler L. Renshaw, and Katie Eklund, “School Climate, Family Structure, and Academic Achievement: A Study of Moderation Effects,” School Psychology Quarterly, 30, no. 1 (2014): 142-157, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tyler_Renshaw/publication/264628273_Scho ol_Climate_Family_Structure_and_Academic_Achievement_A_Study_of_Modera tion_Effects/links/54cf14b60cf24601c092c8e7.pdf. 31 Ibid. 30

School Climate and Population-Based Effects

203

for students. However, the most productive situation for students is when they experience both a positive school climate and a positive community climate.

School Climate and Military Students There are over 1.3 million school-aged military-connected children in the United States. Changes in behavior of children with a military-attached parent, as well as changes in their academic work, have been found to be negatively affected when the parent is deployed or has returned from deployment. Depressive symptoms are reported in approximately 1 in 4 students whose parent is deployed, and according to Flake, Davis, Johnson, and Middleton, 1 in 5 school-age children copes poorly when a parent is deployed, primarily as recorded by decreased academic success and increased coping challenges. 32 Using the Pediatric Symptom Checklist, Flake, et al. found that during parental deployment, school-age children scored high-risk for emotional and behavioral problems 2.5 times more frequently than national norms.33 An important study examined the role of protective factors within schools for these fragile students, including school climate.34 The researchers studied a large sample of military and non-military secondary students and considered the correlations between school climate, military connection, deployment, and mental health. According to the researchers, Findings show that multiple components of school climate are associated with a lower likelihood of depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation and 32

Patricia Lester, Kris Peterson, James Reeves, Larry Knauss, Dorie Glover, Catherine Mogil, Naihua Duan, William Saltzman, Robert Pynoos, Katherine Wilt, and William Beardslee, “The Long War and Parental Combat Deployment: Effects on Military Children and At-Home Spouses,” Journal of American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 49, no. 4 (2010): 310-320, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2875082/; Eric M. Flake, Beth Ellen Davis, Patti L. Johnson, and Laura S. Middleton, “The Psychosocial Effects of Deployment on Military Children,” Journal of Developmental Pediatrics, 30, no. 4 (2009): 271-278, https://reachmilitaryfamilies.umn.edu/sites/.../Flake,%20E.%202009.pdf. 33 Ibid. 34 Kris Tunac DePedro, Ron Avi Astor, Tamika D. Gilreath, Rami Benbenishty, and Ruth Berkowitz, “School Climate, Deployment, and Mental Health Among Students in Military-Connected Schools,” Youth Society, June 30, 2015, doi:10.1177/0044118.

204

Chapter Thirteen increased likelihood of well-being among students in military-connected schools, after controlling for student demographics, military connection, and deployments.

The researchers urge further studies of the importance of school climate for military-connected students. The population-based research in this section pinpoints the importance of school climate on the overall mental health and the ability to cope with school. School climate is a determinant of whether school is a successful school experience, both academically and socially, or not.

Chapter Thirteen: School Climate and Population-Based Effects Summary Points Population-based effects describe the ubiquitous nature of school climate. At each level of the pyramid of intervention is another population of students who are impacted more deeply by school climate. It is important to note that when a school becomes more caring, safer, and encourages positive relationships, it creates engagement opportunities and promotes connectedness. A System of Care environment more often and more accurately identifies students in distress and consequently creates an expectation of services to support students. Negative school climate elements are associated with the causes of dropping out of high school. Changing school climate could be an effective dropout prevention strategy. Some of the most important school climate components related to the decision to drop out of school include the relationship, or lack of it, between the students and teachers and the connectedness with other students. When students first feel the effects of disengagement, thoughts of dropping out of school begin, and this is more pronounced with minority students. Recognizing that creating a school culture and climate that genuinely engages and supports all students is essential to increasing students' achievement and preventing students from dropping out. School climate elements of engagement and interaction between students and teachers are so effective in reducing the dropout rate that they have the potential to cut the dropout rate significantly.

School Climate and Population-Based Effects

205

The size of a school matters for many students, but it seems to be most significant when school climate is not positive. In schools that do not have a positive school climate, gifted students face an environment that not only does not support their learning style, but may also crush or discourage their talents and increase the possibility of gifted students later dropping out of school. The most predictive elements of dropping out of school were boredom, teaching style, and several factors of school climate including the lack of relationships, little or negative interaction with teachers and other students, and a sense of not belonging. Alternative education programs with a positive school climate can support students and aid in their academic remediation and return to a regular school setting instead of dropping out of school. Same-sex attracted students are overrepresented as targets of bullying. A negative school climate impacts same-sex attracted students’ lives at school and beyond. There is a profound effect negative school climates can have on samesex students as they struggle to find connectedness in schools. A positive school climate can be a protective factor for all students, but especially for students with minority sexual orientation. If peers are engaged in a healthy and positive school climate that encourages or at the very least allows students to interact more frequently, the biases against and the aggressiveness toward transgender students decreases. The Phenomenological Variant of Ecological Systems Theory model is a framework to examine strength and resiliency, especially during the process of identity formation in adolescents. When students receive support from both the neighborhoods and schools in the form of supportive adult relationships, their academic outcomes and behaviors are more positive. Schools with a positive school climate can be a safe haven for students even within a violent community. Positive school climate moderates the relationship between violence and trauma, and is related to lower levels of post-traumatic stress symptoms. School climate is controlled as much by the school as by outside factors. School climate has a protective effect for students living in homeless, foster, and one-parent family structures.

206

Chapter Thirteen

Positive school climate can have moderating effects on students from various home situations and with various conditions and circumstances. There are over 1.3 million school-aged military-connected children in the United States. Multiple components of school climate are associated with a lower likelihood of depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation and increased likelihood of well-being among students in military-connected school.

CHAPTER FOURTEEN SCHOOL CLIMATE PART OF THE LARGER WHOLE

“The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.” —Aristotle1 “Success is the sum of small efforts repeated day in and day out.” —R. Collier2

It seems to be true that no substantial, enduring change has ever taken place without first changing the conversation. So, to really change the conversation about school climate, the same old concepts and terminology should not be used. Also, improving school climate is not the endgame. It is much more complicated than that. Schools must also consider the collateral effects of school climate and the much larger picture–where school climate comes together as part of a larger whole. There is nothing simple about human behavior. There is nothing simple about student discipline. And schools cannot wait on Superman or some off-the-shelf program or a fad intervention of some sort to make the issues go away or to simplify them. The fact of the matter is this, there are significant and difficult challenges: teachers cite student discipline problems as the number one issue they face on a regular basis; school administrators cite student discipline in the classroom and around the school as the most time-consuming problem they address each day; and many students indicate that student discipline is a significant problem in the classroom that keeps them from learning. Something has to change. To engage in meaningful conversation about student discipline and ultimately school 1

The quote is widely attributed to Aristotle, but a version of the quote is found in Gestalt psychology as, “The whole is other than the sum of the parts.” Max Wertheimer, “Investigations in Gestalt Theory,” Psychologishe Forschung, Volume 1 (1922): 47-51/. 2 Robert Collier, Secret of the Ages in Seven Volumes (Merchant Books, 1928).

208

Chapter Fourteen

climate, the discussion about data, decision-making, and school climate all have to change. How schools and school districts manage and view data needs to change. What is needed is a different way to look at data. Using the concept of lateral thinking to step outside of one’s training and expertise and view things from a different perspective is needed.3 It is time and prudent to look at data in a different way because doing so may cause schools and school districts to explore how other fields of expertise view data. In talking with epidemiologists, for example, one can discover that their view of data starts with a population-based view and then they drill down from there. Instead of focusing only on targeted reactions such as the consequences for misbehavior, or the apex of a graph of misbehavior, the epidemiological view of data can change the discussion to prevention and intervention, and it provides a basis for developing surveillance measures and prevention procedures for groups and at-risk populations, as well as looking for elements that are pinpointed when problems first emerge. This provides the opportunity to identify causation and then match strategies that impact both groups and populations, thereby also allowing individual treatments to be effective. Then there can be a shift from targeted reactions to population-based prevention and intervention. The epidemiologists say that diseases do not occur by chance and the distribution of diseases is not random.4 If diseases do not occur by chance, then there are always determinants for a disease to occur. If diseases are not distributed at random, then distribution is related to risk factors that need to be studied for the population to identify solutions. Now, consider disruptive behavior and use the epidemiological concepts of determinants and distribution. Disruptive behaviors do not occur by chance and there are always determinants for the disruptive behavior to occur. Disruptive behaviors are not distributed at random; therefore, distribution is related to risk factors that need to be studied for the population to identify solutions. Additionally, if something is random, it is typical for people to feel as though they have no control of it; they cannot influence it or prevent it. Here is a very important distinction. Viewing student discipline data from an epidemiological perspective allows schools and school districts to discern patterns and clues about behavior, like epidemiologists would, and 3

Edward de Bono, Lateral Thinking: Creativity Step by Step (New York, Harper and Row, 1970). 4 Charles H. Hennekens and Julie E. Buring, Epidemiology in Medicine (Boston, Little, Brown, and Company, 1987).

School Climate: Part of the Larger Whole

209

then they are empowered to address the problems. The important point is to look beyond the obvious data elements and look for causal relationships and possible consequential factors. There is a tendency to look at shifts in data without contemplating the cause of the shift. For example, some school districts are content when student expulsion and out-of-school suspension rates decline. But the question has to be explored–did those students remain in the classroom? A deeper look at the data may reveal that those students were sent to an alternative education program rather than being expelled or suspended. Being in an alternative education program is better than being out of school, but has the issue truly been addressed–how can it be when the number of students disciplined remained the same and the only thing that changed was the consequence? Has the school district addressed those school climate issues that affect student behavior? A more sophisticated view of data is essential for schools and school districts to fully understand the story and the meaning of the data and the impact school climate elements and other elements can have on student discipline and student achievement. In addition to changing the conversation about how data is viewed, school districts must also consider how decisions are made. How we characterize and respond to student behavior has an impact on student discipline. Decision-making can be viewed in this sense as a determinant, and how the dynamics of assigning cause to behavior imposes on the decisionmaking process is important to understand. Attribution Theory is the study of how people assign cause to the behavior of others.5 The assignment of cause to other people’s behavior is normal and common. Everyone does it. But here’s the important point: research in Attribution Theory shows that what people assign as the cause of behavior determines in large part how they react to the behavior–such as how and why certain consequences for disruptive behavior are selected. The most obvious example in everyday life is road rage. A person cut off in traffic by a driver is outraged–yelling, screaming, and maybe even shaking his fist. Why do people respond this way? It is because they attribute the person’s discourteous behavior and reckless driving to disrespect for others and a total disregard for safety. Therefore, the attribution becomes as important as the behavior. But would people react the same way if they knew the person was racing home because he received word that his little newborn baby was very sick? Of

5

Fritz Heider, Psychology of Interpersonal Relations (New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1958).

210

Chapter Fourteen

course, people would not react in the same angry, hostile way, because the attribution changes. Going deeper into Attribution Theory, there is a concept that snares almost everyone. It’s called the Fundamental Attribution Error.6 Fundamental Attribution Error occurs when a person incorrectly attributes a cause or motivation to behavior and then responds disproportionately or incorrectly to the behavior based on the perceived cause rather than the behavior itself. If two people do the same thing, most people are more severe in their reaction and the administration of consequences if they think the cause of the behavior was defiance or disrespect, than if they thought the behavior was caused by circumstances such as peer pressure. But what if the attribution was wrong? That’s Fundamental Attribution Error. The value in understanding and considering the attribution dynamic is that it makes people pause and take a closer, more sophisticated view of their notions and assumptions about the causes of misbehavior. For example, is it possible that the cause of a student’s misbehavior is circumstances rather than defiance? Attribution: “Is the fighting problem because the students don’t feel safe? Are they acting out because they can’t speak up?” In fact, some teachers and school administrators seldom consider possible situational factors such as the elements of school climate that may impact or even contribute to student misbehavior. If behavior is attributed to power or disrespect, the consequence is more severe than if the behavior is attributed to factors that influence student behavior, such as peer influence, even though the behavior is the same.7 Think of that in terms of consequences for student misbehavior. What does student data really show? How are teachers and administrators really making decisions? With Fundamental Attribution Error there is a tendency to place an undue emphasis on internal characteristics, motives, perceived attitudes, or the personality of the person to explain behavior rather than considering situational or 6

Lee Ross, L. “The Intuitive Psychologist and His Shortcomings: Distortions in the Attribution Process,” in Berkowitz, L. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 10 (1977): 173–220, http://web.mit.edu/curhan/www/docs/Articles/15341_Readings/Social_Cognition/ Ross_Intuitive_Psychologist_in_Adv_Experiment_Soc_Psych_vol10_p173.pdf; Edward E. James and Victor A. Harris, “The Attribution of Attitudes,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 3, Issue 1(1967): 1-24, http://www.radford.edu/~jaspelme/443/spring2007/Articles/Jones_n_Harris_1967.pdf. 7 Garry W. McGiboney, “Attribution of Educators and Non-Educators about Student Misbehavior” (dissertation, Georgia State University, 1985).

School Climate: Part of the Larger Whole

211

school climate factors. This is critically important because the Fundamental Attribution Error can become the norm in a business, a school, a courtroom, or in any group of people. The great shifting of blame to internal factors in all situations makes change difficult and the current norms of Fundamental Attribution Error acceptable. Think of that in terms of consequences for student misbehavior. What does student data really show? How are schools really making decisions? It’s important to ask. It is a fairly common belief that students and/or the community determine a school’s climate, and that’s why many people think misbehavior is by chance and is random. However, as studies cited in this book have noted, the factors that most significantly determine if a school’s climate is positive or negative are the personal interactions of the teachers and administrators in the school and whether those interactions interface with students. Step outside of education for a minute; think of the business world. A Chief Executive Officer that successfully turns a company around very often changes the workplace climate. Most people make many of their personal choices and decisions based on climate; for example, the climate of a grocery store or restaurant. School climate is no different. Most adults can remember when they felt safe or unsafe at school, or when they felt connected to a caring adult in school or completely ignored and isolated. Adults upon reflection of their school years can remember how it felt to participate in school activities and events or how it felt to be a non-participant. Adults can also explore their memories of school to recall how it felt to be engaged with teachers and other students in learning, or how it felt to be disengaged with a feeling of being an outsider. Students in any environment need that environment to be stable and safe if they are to reach their full potential. That is the importance of school climate, and notice the research that points to the importance of school climate in effective risk prevention. If students do not feel safe at school, do not feel welcomed at school, or are not treated with respect and are not given opportunities to learn, engage, interact, mature, and grow, they will not meet their academic potential, develop emotionally, or learn positive social lessons. School Climate refers to the quality and character of school life. School Climate is based on patterns of students’, parents’, and school personnel’s experience of school life and reflects norms, goals, values, interpersonal interactions, teaching and learning practices and organizational practices. School climate is a quality of life issues. John Dewey once said

212

Chapter Fourteen

education is not only preparation for life; it is life itself.8 But that is not all that Dewey said. He also said, I believe that this educational process has two sides-one psychological and one sociological; and neither can be subordinated to the other or neglected without evil results following. Of these two sides, the psychological is the basis. The child's own instincts and powers furnish the material and give the starting point for all education. Save as the efforts of the educator connect with some activity which the child is carrying on of his own initiative independent of the educator, education becomes reduced to a pressure from without. It may, indeed, give certain external results but cannot truly be called educative. Without insight into the psychological structure and activities of the individual, the educative process will, therefore, be haphazard and arbitrary. If it chances to coincide with the child's activity it will get leverage; if it does not, it will result in friction, or disintegration, or arrest of the child’s nature. I believe that much of present education fails because it neglects this fundamental principle of the school as a form of community life. It conceives the school as a place where certain information is to be given, where certain lessons are to be learned, or where certain habits are to be formed. The value of these is conceived as lying largely in the remote future; the child must do these things for the sake of something else he is to do; they are mere preparation. As a result they do not become a part of the life experience of the child and so are not truly educative.9

Dewey also pointed out the importance of the school as a whole and not as part of a whole: “I believe that the discipline of the school should proceed from the life of the school as a whole and not directly from the teacher”. Dewey is referring to the whole of the school and not a part of the school as essential to the value of the educational experience for children. A positive school climate has shown to impact and influence many different behaviors and outcomes. The systematic study of school climate has led to a growing body of research that attests to its importance in a variety of overlapping ways, including social, emotional, and intellectual development; sense of safety and well-being; mental health; and healthy relationships. Fundamental beliefs about behavior must change from attributing all behavior of students to internal control, to the possibility that situations may influence student behavior. To emphasize this point, we 8

John Dewey, “My Pedagogic Creed,” School Journal, 54 (1897): 77-80, http://dewey.pragmatism.org/creed.htm. 9 Ibid.

School Climate: Part of the Larger Whole

213

should include Attribution Theory not only in the conversation about student discipline, data, and decision-making, but it should also be included in the professional development and college training of teachers and administrators, because by pointing out the concepts and consequences of attribution they are better prepared to understand and recognize the determinants of behavior. Pointing out the effects of attribution–assigning cause to behavior–makes people more aware of their reactions and why. That’s the power of changing perception. To change behavior, relationships have to change; to change relationships, values have to change; to change values, norms have to change; to change norms, culture has to change; and to change culture, school climate has to change. Schools cannot often change behavior without changing the other elements. Schools may be able to force change for a short period of time, for example by adopting strict discipline and consequence measures, but it is typically not a sustainable change if it is not part of the change in school climate. As pointed out in the research cited in this book, school climate research indicates that a positive school climate can improve self-esteem; can mitigate the negative effects of self-criticism, which plagues many of our children and adolescents; can improve mental health outcomes and attitudes; can reduce drug use and psychiatric problems; and can reduce student discipline referrals, as well as other impacts. Schools and school districts must also consider that the potentially positive impacts of projects, programs, initiatives, and interventions are compromised, threatened, or weakened if implemented in a school climate that is unstable. Many potentially effective intervention programs have been compromised because they were implemented in an unstable school climate. Stabilizing the school climate first gives interventions a chance to be effective. With a stable school climate research finds that prevention programs have a chance to work. A study by Beets, Flay, Vuchinich, Acock, Li, and Allred found that teachers’ and students’ perception of school climate affects the implementation of intervention and prevention strategies, including school improvement, either in a positive or negative way depending on their respective perception of school climate. 10 Also, research indicates that a positive school climate is critical to effective risk prevention implementa-

10

Beets, Flay, Vuchinich, Acock, Li, and Allred, “School Climate and Teachers’ Beliefs and Attitudes,” 264-275.

214

Chapter Fourteen

tion.11 Teachers’ and students’ perceptions of school climate stability may affect the implementation of school intervention strategies such as antibullying, as well as school improvement efforts.12 Expanding the collateral scope of the school climate concept takes schools and school districts into areas of thought that heretofore have not often been included, such as expanding school climate to early learning climates. Oftentimes preschools are left out of school climate discussions and strategic planning regarding student discipline, and also schools have not focused as much as they should on K-3 grades. There is a strong need to include early learning centers in efforts to improve learning climates, because a lot of student behavior is shaped in the early years. Studies show that in some states the out-of-school suspension rates for preschools are higher than for high schools.13 There are also indications that focusing on improving early learning center climates reduces suspensions dramatically, which in the long run helps more students be prepared when they come to kindergarten.14 Changing early learning climate in pre-school and into the K-3 grades can shape behavior that impacts later grades. Early access to a positive learning climate can minimize the prevalence of discipline problems and increase academic outcomes. Changing early learning environments can improve behavior, language skills, and provide skills for students that allow them to shift from expression through behavior to expression through language. When children do not have adequate language skills, their behavior becomes their language. 11

Janna Juvonen, Vi-Nhuan Le, Tessa Kaganoff, Catherine H. Augustine, and Louay Constant, Focus on the Wonder Years: Challenges Facing the American Middle School (Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation, 2004), https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2004/RAND_MG139.p df; Ming Te Wang, Robert L. Selman, Thomas J. Dishion, and Elizabeth A. Stormshak, “A Tobit Regression Analysis of the Covariation between Middle School Students' Perceived School Climate and Behavioral Problems,” Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20, no. 2: (2010): 274-286. doi:10.1111/j.15327795.2010.00648.x. 12 Beets, Flay, Vuchinich, Acock, Li, and Allred, “School Climate and Teachers’ Beliefs and Attitudes,” 264-275; Molloy, Moore, Trail, Van Epps, and Hopfer, “Understanding Real-World Implementation Quality,” 593-605. 13 Walter S. Gilliam and Golan Shahar, “Preschool and Child Care Expulsion and Suspension: Rates and Predictors in One State,” Infants and Young Children, 19, no. 3 (2006): 228-245. 14 L. Fox and D.P. Binder, Getting Preschool Classrooms on Board with PBIS, University of South Florida, Florida Center for Inclusive Communities, August, 2015.

School Climate: Part of the Larger Whole

215

Schools and school districts should consider other factors related to student behavior and school climate, including vocabulary and reading. Hart and Risley conducted a study that measured the difference in the number of words heard by children in low income, working class and higher income families.15 The difference was significant, if not shocking. They identified a gap of more than 30 million words between the low income children’s and the higher income children’s exposure to words. This early language exposure has a profound impact on children. A child’s ability to read by the end of third grade is attributable to their vocabulary at age 3, which is influenced by the number of words they heard in their first three years of life. So by age 3 the children exposed to more words (“language nutrition”) will have doubled the speaking and listening vocabulary as a child with less exposure to language interaction. The difference in vocabulary is not there at birth. The separation in vocabulary development through language exposure does not start until about 16 months, but once it happens, the split is rapid, leading to the 30 million words gap. Equally important are the different levels and the amount of encouragement children receive who also suffer from the word gap. According to Hart and Risley, Extrapolating to the first four years of life, the average child in a professional family would have accumulated 560,000 more instances of encouraging feedback than discouraging feedback, and an average child in a working-class family would have accumulated 100,000 more encouragements than discouragements. But an average child in a welfare family would have accumulated 125,000 more instances of prohibitions than encouragements. By the age of four, the average child in a welfare family might have had 144,000 fewer encouragements and 84,000 more discouragements of his or her behavior than the average child in a working-class family.16

These findings indicate that something can be done in those early months to prevent the word gap and vocabulary underdevelopment. As a society and in preschools and schools there can either be an effort to remediate the word gap and language deficit and create positive early learning climates, or continue to rely on discipline consequences for inappropriate behavior that may in large part stem from the lack of adequate ex15

Betty Hart and Todd R. Risley, Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children (Baltimore, Brooks Publishing Company, 1995). 16 Ibid.

216

Chapter Fourteen

pressive language and the development of prerequisite skills necessary to learning to read. The implementation of PBIS in preschools and in Head Start centers can improve the learning climate necessary to promote language development and reduce the number of children removed from preschool because of behavior. Walter found that preschool expulsion rates are three times higher than K-12 rates and boys are 4.5 times more likely than girls to be expelled from preschool.17 Also, the study found that African-American children are twice as likely to be expelled from a preschool as White or Latino children. A positive early learning climate can be rich with engagement, connectedness, and relationships–all of the ingredients necessary to develop language in young children and essential to preparation for kindergarten. The state of Iowa developed PBIS Crosswalk with Head Start program standards at each Tier of the PBIS frameworks pyramid (Iowa State University). This is an example of the crosswalk and how it can apply to teachers: “PBIS: Teachers work in partnership with families, establishing and maintaining regular, on-going, two-way communications that are linked to Head Start Performance Standards: 45 CFR 1304.51©(1)(2); HS Act 642 (b)(1); HS Act 642 (b)(3)(A).” Linking early learning climate improvement through PBIS frameworks can increase language exposure and build a vocabulary that aids children in the skills and preparation required for them to be reading proficiently by the third grade. Third grade reading proficiency increases the likelihood of high school graduation. According to the 2014 Kids Count Report, students who do not read proficiently are four to six times more likely to be suspended from school and later drop out of school.18 The ability to read at grade level at the end of third grade is the highest–not one of the highest– but the highest predictor of high school graduation. Reading is linked to success in school in several ways. A study showed that third grade reading proficiency is linked to eighth grade math proficiency. 19 Eighth grade math proficiency is a cornerstone for success in upper level math classes that are required to graduate from high school. The linkages are there; productive learning climates from pre-school 17

Ibid. Kids Count Data Book 2014 (Kids Count Data Center: A Project of the Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2014), http://www.aecf.org/m/resourcedoc/aecf-2014kidscount databook-2014.pdf. 19 D. Ayoubi, Correlation of Third Grade Reading Proficiency and Eighth Grade Math Proficiency (Atlanta, Georgia Department of Education, Policy and Research Division, 2014). 18

School Climate: Part of the Larger Whole

217

through high school are vital to the success of children and youth in school. As schools, school districts, and states understand the importance of school climate, they have to be bold enough to measure it and strategic enough to measure it in such a way that helps schools understand what they need to do sustain a positive school climate or improve school climate. If measurements of school climate do not lead to results that are prescriptive (useful for schools), then there is less motivation to fully report data which then creates confusion and missed opportunities to improve schools. In response to the compelling body of research that underscores the importance of school climate, states should consider developing school climate ratings for each school. A school climate rating can be a valuable diagnostic tool to determine if a school is on the right path to school improvement. As issues are discovered through the school climate rating process, those issues can be mapped to researched-based effective practices for areas pinpointed as problems in schools based on the school climate rating. Improving school climate is not a panacea; it will reduce problems and help isolate problems, but there will continue to be other issues that have to be addressed. But just like workplace climate determines to a large extent the success of a company, school climate is important to students, teachers, and parents as a measure of school success. However, implementing effective school climate strategies may have surprising, if not unexpected, collateral consequences. In a study by Visser, Kramer, Snyder, Sebian, McGiboney, and Handler that examined the prevalence of medication treatment for students with Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder, the researchers found a surprising result.20 A positive school climate was associated with increases in medication treatment for students with ADHD, rather than the predicted decreases. Upon closer review of the data, it was revealed that improving school climate created a school culture where teachers and students began to take more notice of one another’s needs and concerns. As the relationship between students and teachers improved because of school climate, teachers became more aware of and sensitive to the needs of students and students were more likely to confide in teachers. Consequently, teachers were more engaged in seeking the re20

Susanna N. Visser, Dennis Kramer, Angela B. Snyder, Joyce Sebian, Garry McGiboney, and Arden Handler, “Student-Perceived School Climate is Associated with ADHD Medication Treatment among Adolescents in Medicaid,” Journal of Attention Disorders, online February 20, 2015, doi:10.1177/ 1087054715569601.

218

Chapter Fourteen

sources necessary to assist the students, meaning that the expectation that the students with needs would have access to services increased significantly. That is the next step after improving school climate–student support resources development and access to support services. Improving school climate has other ramifications that must be considered. Reducing student discipline issues and improving student academic outcomes is not the endgame. School must be strategic and perceptive enough to understand that there will always be additional collateral connections. Improving school climate increases the number of caring adults in the school, which can be jeopardized if those seeking assistance for students find that it was a broken promise and a shallow purpose because there are no services to help those students who need them. The message is clear–as schools and school districts move to improve school climate, they must at the same time seek to identify the resources students need to handle life’s stressors and mental health as well as physical health issues. Student support resource identification and access is not a new challenge for public schools, but in order for the gains made in school climate to be sustained, a clarion call for student support resources will be necessary or the underpinnings of school climate efforts will be at risk. Schools cannot travel down this path alone. Schools should align school climate efforts and collaboration with local and state public health, mental health, Medicaid, and other service providers that assist with the challenges of access. Access has been for too long been a binary discussion when in fact it is multidimensional. Access is not a “yes” or “no” proposition. The Center for Humanitarian Logistics at Georgia Technological Institute states that access has six elements and unless all six are met then a service is should not be considered accessible: Aware: The population is informed that the service exists and what it provides. Oftentimes schools are not aware of the services available to the students and families in their school. This can be due to a lack of funding in the service provider’s budget for communications and marketing. Essential services may exist but schools may not be aware of them. Affordable: Prices of services meet population ability to pay. A common lament from schools is the lack of affordability of services. As more service providers move to fee-based services, fewer affordable services are available to students and families. Essential services may exist, but they may not be affordable.

School Climate: Part of the Larger Whole

219

Accessibility: The location of service aligns with population location and ability to travel. Services that are “only” five miles away from students, for example, may be completely inaccessible without transportation. Available: The size or volume of the services meets the population needs. Services are not available in the truest sense if there exists a three-to-four-hour wait to receive services, or if the hours of service are not practical. If a mental health clinic is convenient, affordable, and parents are aware of the services but the operations hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., then the parents have to choose between their child being in school or being in the mental health clinic. Accommodate: The delivery of services accommodates population needs. The presence of services must match the need for services. If a medical center opens that provides an array of services for children and families, but dental services are not included, then it may not accommodate the needs of students and families. In many schools the number one physical reason for student absences is due to dental issues. Acceptable: Characteristics of services provides and the population is acceptable to one another. If a mental health clinic opens in a predominantly Hispanic neighborhood but there are no dual language therapists in the clinic then the service does not accommodate the need.21 The process of the alignment of services necessary for students may be beyond the scope of schools, just as the process of securing collaboration from community resources to improve school climate may require assistance. In some communities and states, there are collaborative efforts to bring attention to the importance of school climate and access to services for students. One example is the work being done by the non-profit advocacy group Appleseed with chapters in several states, including Georgia. Georgia Appleseed started a campaign to reduce the number of students suspended and expelled in public schools in Georgia with a strong interest in disproportional suspensions and expulsions of African-American students. When Georgia Appleseed learned about the state’s efforts to focus 21

Georgia Tech Health and Humanitarian Systems Center at the Stewart School of Industrial and Systems Engineering created a matrix of access definitions and types, http://hhscenter.gatech.edu/home.

220

Chapter Fourteen

on school climate improvements as a means to prevent suspensions and expulsions, it created a coalition of many public and private sector partners to establish a common agenda to support efforts to improve school climate and identify resources for that effort, as well as support resources for students and families. Additionally, they sponsored meetings with universities to discuss including school climate in teacher and administrator preparation programs. Another collaboration example that can be linked to support school climate is the Grade Level Reading Campaign sponsored by the Annie E. Casey Foundation in several states.22 In Georgia, the Get Georgia Reading Campaign (GGRC) with partners from all segments of public, private, community, and other sectors worked together to build a common agenda with four pillars, including language nutrition, access, productive learning climate, and teaching and learning, beginning with preschool. This campaign leveraged resources to secure grants to expand school climate training and the development of a prototype for preschool through third grade school climate. These are the types of collaborative efforts that are necessary for a positive school climate to be sustainable. The GGRC is an illustration of how and why school climate is part of the larger whole. Because of the work of the GGRC Cabinet leaders, made up of local leaders and state leaders, they embraced the four pillars and began applying them at the local level. A public-private partnership launched “Talk with Me Baby,” a statewide initiative that is training professionals like nurses and WIC nutritionists to deliver language nutrition coaching to parents, helping parents become “conversational partners” with their infants.23 By tapping federal funding sources and engaging statewide systems, partners are providing free meals and literacy activities during the summer to children at libraries in 22 previously underserved counties. In addition, private funding is supporting the integration of two evidence-based frameworks for positive learning climates–one for early learning centers and one for K22

Annie E. Casey Foundation sponsors the Early Reading Proficiency in the United States Initiative to increase the number of students reading proficiently by the end of the third grade by increasing student access to support services, increasing teacher quality, and improving school climate, www.aecf.org/resources/earlyreading-proficency-in-the -united-states/. 23 “Talk with Me Baby” is a cross-sector coalition created to increase preparation for school by bringing language nutrition to each young child in Georgia, which includes coaching parents of babies and young children and building training modules for nurses who work with mothers and babies, www.talkwithmebaby.org/about.

School Climate: Part of the Larger Whole

221

12 schools–to better support the social-emotional development of children. Research conducted to guide the GGRC’s efforts indicated that school climate dramatically impacts third grade reading outcomes and, consequently, the state is leveraging investment in PBIS with private funding to create a blended model of the preschool and school-wide PBIS frameworks that can be replicated. Many of the elements of school climate are often debunked as “small stuff,” which implies that they are meaningless and a waste of time and that they are not interconnected to create a larger whole. Perhaps that is the power of a positive school climate, because it operates on the premise that it is the small stuff that many times matters the most, and that the connectivity of the small stuff is what changes systems and individual attitudes. Meisha Ross-Porter, principal at the Urban Assembly Bronx School of Law captured it well when she wrote: As districts and schools across the country are rethinking school discipline, it’s important to note that creating a positive school culture—one that is safe and supportive of all students and lays the foundation for high student achievement—is not about creating enough rules to cover every infraction a student could possibly violate. It is about creating systematic routines and rituals that students, faculty, staff, and families are invested in, and that encourage young people and adults alike to always do the right thing, whether the right thing to is follow certain school rules or give a tearful 6th grader a reassuring hug. Each morning, my three APs and I greet our students and sweat what some might call the “small stuff.” We smile and welcome students to school; check and remind them about dress code; look directly at them for any hint of a problem, worry or concern; and, if we see or sense that one of our students is in need, we ask and address it immediately.24

All students and teachers deserve to attend schools that provide a safe, secure, and positive school climate. Schools and school districts can improve school climate and sustain positive school climates through collaboration and by understanding the dynamics of school climate that research has identified and verified. When a positive school climate becomes an expectation instead of a goal, then education will be well on the way to significant improvement of outcomes for all students.

24

Meisha Ross-Porter, “Sweating the Small Stuff Is the Key to Improving School Climate and Discipline,” Homeroom (blog), July 22, 2015, http://blog.ed.gov/2015/07/sweating-the-small-stuff-is-key-to-improving-schoolclimate-and-discipline/.

REFERENCES

Agasisti, Thomaso and Sergio Longobardi. “Educational Institutions, Resources, and Students' Resiliency: An Empirical Study about OECD Countries.” Economic Bulletin, 34, no. 2 (2014): 1055-1067. http://www.accessecon.com/Pubs/EB/2014/Volume34/EB-14-V34-I2P98.pdf. Agron, Joe. “36th Annual Maintenance and Operations Cost Study: Schools.” School Planning and Management Magazine, April Issue, 2007. http://asumag.com/maintenance/36th-annual-maintenance-operationscost-study-colleges. Ahghar, Ghodsy. “The Role of School Organizational Climate in Occupational Stress among Secondary School Teachers in Tehran.” International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 21, no. 4 (2009): 319-329. doi:10.2478/v10001-008-0018-8. Allport, Gordon W. “The Historical Background of Modern Social Psychology.” In G. Lindzey (Ed.), Handbook of Social Psychology, (Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1954): 3-56. Allport, Gordon W. The Nature of Prejudice (Cambridge: Perseus Books, 1954). American Bar Association. Zero Tolerance Policy Report, 2001. http://www.americanbar.org/groups/child_law/tools_to_use/attorneys/s chool_disciplinezerotolerancepolicies.html. American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force. “Are Zero Tolerance Policies Effective in Schools?” American Psychologist, 63, no. 9 (2008): 852-862. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.9.852. Anderson, Angelika, Richard J. Hamilton, and John Hattie. “Classroom Climate and Motivated Behavior in Secondary Schools.” Learning Environment Research, 7 (2004): 211-225. Anderson, Carolyn S. “The Search for School Climate: A Review of Research,” Review of Educational Research, 52, No. 3 (1982): 368-420. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1170423. Anderson-Butcher, Dawn, Anthony Amrose, Aidyn Iachini, and Annahita Ball. “The Development of the Perceived School Experiences Scale.” Research on Social Work Practice, 22, no. 2 (2011): 186-194. doi:10.1177/1049731511419866.

The Psychology of School Climate

223

Arcia, Emily. “Achievement and Enrollment Status on Suspended Students.” Education and Urban Society, 38, no. 3 (2006): 359-369. doi:10.1177/0013124506286947. Ardic, K. and S. Polatci. “Burnout Syndrome and the Other Side of Medallion: Engagement.” Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Services, 32 (2009): 21-46. Arthur, Michael W. The Communities That Care Youth Survey: Additional Information for Checklist Criteria. Unpublished memo referenced in Safe Supportive Learning–American Institutes for Research, 2011. Attar-Schwartz, Shalhevet. “Peer Sexual Harassment Victimization at School: The Roles of Student Characteristics, Cultural Affiliation, and School Factors,” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 79, no. 3 (2009): 407-420, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0016553. Ayoubi, D. Correlation of Third Grade Reading Proficiency and Eighth Grade Math Proficiency. Atlanta, Georgia Department of Education, Policy and Research Division, 2014. Ayoubi, D., and Garry McGiboney. “Comparison of School Climate Star Ratings and College and Career Ready Performance Index.” Atlanta: Georgia Department of Education, Policy Division, 2014. Bai, Nasser, Mehdi Heydari, and Safura Niknahad. “The Relationship between School Organizational Climate and Physical Education Teachers’ Effectiveness.” Research Journal of Sport Sciences, 2, no. 1 (2014): 27-31. http://rjssjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/paper15.pdf. Bandura, Albert. “Self-Efficacy Mechanism in Human Agency.” American Psychologist, 37 (1982): 122-147. http://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Bandura/Bandura1982AP.pdf. Bandura, Albert, Dorothea Ross, and Sheila Ross. “Transmission of Aggression through Imitation of Aggressive Models.” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, (1961): 575-582. http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Bandura/bobo.htm. Bao, Zhenzhou, Dongping Li, Wei Zhang, Yanhui Wang. “School Climate and Delinquency among Chinese Adolescents: Analyses of Effortful Control as a Moderator and Deviant Peer Group Affiliation as a Mediator.” Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 43 (2015): 81-93. doi:10.1007/s10802-014-9903-8. Barile, John P., Dana K. Donohue, Elizabeth R. Anthony, Andrew M. Baker, Scott R. Weaver, Christopher C. Henrich. “Teacher-Student Relationship Climate and School Outcomes: Implications for Educational Policy Initiatives.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence, linkspringer.com March 2011. doi:10.1007/s10964-011-9652-8.

224

References

Barrett, Susan B., Catherine P. Bradshaw, and Teri Lewis-Palmer. “Maryland Statewide PBIS Initiative: Systems, Evaluation, and Next Steps.” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10 (2008): 105-114. doi:10.1177/1098300707312541. Beets, Michael W. Brian R. Flay, Samuel Vuchinich, Alan C. Acock, KinKit Li, and Carol Allred. “School Climate and Teachers’ Beliefs and Attitudes Associated with Implementation of the Positive Action Program.” Prevention Science, 9, no. 4 (2008): 264-275. doi:10.1007/s11121-008-0100-2. Beychioglu, Kadir and Mahire Aslan. “Change and Innovation as Main Dynamics in School Development: Administrators and Teachers’ Roles.” Journal of Faculty of Education, 8, no. 1 (2010): 153-173. Biag, Manuelito. “A Descriptive Analysis of School Connectedness: The Views of School Personnel – Longitudinal Research with More than 15,000 Students Finds that Youth Who Report Feeling Safe at School Demonstrate Better than Average Educational and Psychological Functioning.” Urban Education, SAGE Journals online, June 24, 2014. doi:10.1177/0042085914539772. Birnham, Amanda S., Kelly R. Evenson, Robert W. Motl, Rod K. Dishman, Carolyn C. Voorhees, James Sallis, John P. Elder, and Marsha Dowda. “Scale Development for Perceived School Climate for Girls’ Physical Activity.” American Journal of Health Behavior, 29, no. 3 (2005): 250-257. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2494732/. Bishop, Darcie J. “The Relationship Between Faculty Perceptions of Music Unit Administrators’ Leadership Behavior and Organizational Climate.” Doctoral thesis, University of Mississippi, 2003. Bitsadze, Maya and M. Japaridze. “Personal and Social Aspects of Teacher Burnout in Georgia.” Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 59, no. 59 (2014): 7-14. http://journals.indexcopernicus.com/abstract.php?icid=1100123. Black, Glenda L. “Correlational Analysis of Servant Leadership and School Climate.” Journal of Inquiry and Practice, 13, no. 4 (2010): 437-466. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ914879.pdf. Block, Lory. “The Leadership-Culture Connection: An Exploratory Investigation.” Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 24, no. 5 (2003): 318–334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437730310494293. Blum, Robert W. and Heather P. Libbey. “School Connectedness– Strengthening Health and Education Outcomes for Teenagers, Executive Summary.” Journal of School Health, 74, no. 7 (2004): 231.

The Psychology of School Climate

225

http://leohchen.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Schoolof-Health-Journal-School-Spirit.pdf. Bond, Lyndal, Helen Butler, Lyndal Thomas, John Carlin, Sara Glover, Glenn Bowes, and George Patton. “Social and School Connectedness in Early Secondary School as Predictors of Late Teenage Substance Use, Mental Health, and Academic Outcomes.” Journal of Adolescent Health, 40, no. 4 (2007): 357.e9-357.e18. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.10.013. Booker, Brittany, Jacqueline Gilford, Taslim Van Hattum, Lindsey Rudov, and Thomas Carton. “Methods beyond Plate Waste: Evaluating School Climate, Policy, and Student Satisfaction.” Paper presented at the American Public Health Association Conference, New Orleans, November 15, 2014. Borowiec-Koczera, Ann. “Professional Development for School Administrators: Effects on School Climate.” Dissertation, Johnson and Wales University, 2001. http://scholarsarchive.jwu.edu/dissertations/AAI3270293. Bosworth, K., L. Ford, and Diley Hernandez. “School Climate Factors Contributing to Student and Faculty Perceptions of Safety in Select Arizona Schools.” Journal of School Health, 81, no. 4 (2011): 194-201. doi:10.1111/j.1746-1561.2010.00579.x. Bradshaw, Catherine P., Christine W. Koth, Leslie A. Thornton, and Philip J. Leaf. “Altering School Climate through School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: Findings from a GroupRandomized Effectiveness Trial.” Prevention Science, 10, no. 2 (2009): 100-115. doi:10.1007/s11121-008-0114-9. Bradshaw, Catherine P., Mary M. Mitchell, and Philip J. Leaf. “Examining the Effects of School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on Student Outcomes.” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, no. 3 (2010): 133-148. doi:10.1177/1098300709334798. Bradshaw, Catherine P., Tracy E. Waasdorp, and Philip J. Leaf. “Examining Variation in the Impact of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: Findings from a Randomized Controlled Effectiveness Trial.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, no 2 (2015): 546-557. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037630. Brand, Stephen, Robert Felner, Anne Seitsinger, Amy Burns, and Natalie Bolton. “A Large Scale Study of the Assessment of the Social Environment of Middle and Secondary Schools: The Validity and Utility of Teachers' Ratings of School Climate, Cultural Pluralism, and Safety Problems for Understanding School Effects and School Improvement.” Journal of School Psychology, 46, no. 5 (2008):507-535.

226

References

doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2007.12.001. Brand, Stephen, Robert Felner, Minsuk Shim, Anne Seitsinger, and Thaddeus Dumas. “Middle School Improvement and Reform: Development and Validation of a School-Level Assessment of Climate, Cultural Pluralism, and School Safety.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, no. 3 (2003): 570-588. Bronfenbrenner, Urie. The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1979. Brophy-Herb, Holly E., Robert E. Lee, M. Angela Nievar, and Gary Stollak. “Preschoolers’ Social Competence: Relations to Family Characteristics, Teacher Behaviors, and Classroom Climate.” Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 26, no. 2 (2007): 134-148. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2006.12.004. Brown, Kimberly and Frederick J. Medway. “School Climate and Teacher Beliefs in a School Effectively Serving Poor South Carolina AfricanAmerican Students: A Case Study.” Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, no. 4 (2007) 529-540. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.002. Bulcock, Jeffrey W. “Indicators of the Quality of School Life: A Validation Study.” Paper presented at the International Symposium on the Methodological Aspects of Empirical Research in Sociology, Institute of Sociological Research, The USSR Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 1988. Buluc, Bekir and Ahmet Melih Gunes. “Relationship between Organizational Justice and Organizational Commitment in Primary Schools.” Anthropologist, 18, no. 1 (2014). http://www.krepublishers.com/02Journals/T-Anth/Anth-18-0-000-14-Web/Anth-18-1-000-14-AbstPDF/T-ANTH-18-1-145-14-1062-Buluc-B/T-ANTH-18-1-145-141062-Buluc-B-Tx[14].pdf. Butler, E.D. and M.J. Alborg, Tennessee School Climate Inventory: A Resource Manual. Memphis: Center for Research in Education Policy, 1991. Byrd, Christy M. “Measurement of Racial/Ethnic Identity in Children: A Critical Review,” Journal of Black Psychology, 38 (2011): 3-31. doi:10.1177/009579841039754. Calderella, Paul, Ryan H. Shatzer, Kristy M. Gray, K. Richard Young, and Ellie L. Young. “The Effects of School-Wide Positive Behavior Support on Middle School Climate and Student Outcomes.” Research in Middle Level Education, 35, no. 4 (2011): 1-14. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ959830.pdf.

The Psychology of School Climate

227

Calkins, Susan C. “Psychobiological Models of Adolescent Risk: Implications for Prevention and Intervention.” Developmental Psychobiology, 52, (2009): 213-215. http://www.reclaimingfutures.org/sites/blog.reclaimingfutures.org/files /userfiles/Calkins.Psychobiological-Models-of-Adolescent-Risk.pdf. Cerezo, Fuensanta and Manuel Ato. “Social Status, Gender, Classroom Climate and Bullying Among Adolescents Pupils.” Annals of Psychology, 26, no. 1 (2010): 137-144. http://www.siis.net/documentos/ficha/183784.pdf. Chang, Janet and Thao N. Le. “Multiculturalism as a Dimension of School Climate: The Impact on the Academic Achievement of Asian American and Hispanic Youth.” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16, no. 4 (2010): 485-492. doi:10.1037/a0020654. Chen, Greg and Lynne A. Weikert. “Student Background, School Climate, School Disorder, and Student Achievement: An Empirical Study of New York City’s Middle Schools.” Journal of School Violence, 7, no. 4 (2008): 3-20. doi:10.1080/15388220801973813. Chetty, Raj, John N. Friedman, and Jonah E. Rockoff. “Measuring the Impacts of Teachers: Evaluating Bias in Teacher Value-Added Estimates.” American Economic Review, 104, no. 9 (2014): 2593-2632. doi:10.1257/aer.104.9.2593. Ciudad, Real L. “Principals and Their Impact on School Climate.” Dissertation, California State University at San Marcos, 2015. Cloete, M. “The Relationship between Leadership Styles and Organizational Climate.” Master’s dissertation, University of South Africa, 2011. Collie, Rebecca J., Jennifer D. Shapka, and Nancy E. Perry. “Predicting Teacher Commitment: The Impact of School Climate and Social Emotional Learning.” Psychology in the Schools, 48, no. 10 (2011): 10341048. doi:10.1002/pits.20611. Comer, James. Yale School of Medicine’s Child Study Center, 1960. http://childstudycenter.yale.edu/. Connell, Nadine M., Nina Barbieri, and Jennifer M. Reingle Gonzalez. “Understanding School Effects on Students’ Willingness to Report Peer Weapon Carrying.” Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 13, no. 3 (2015): 258-289. doi:10.1177/1541204014544512. Consortium on Chicago School Research Survey of Chicago Public Schools, The University of Chicago, 2000. Cooley, Charles H. Human Nature and the Social Order. Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1902.

228

References

Costenbader, Virginia and Samia Markson. “School Suspension: A Study with Secondary School Students.” Journal of School Psychology, 36, no. 1 (1998): 59-82. doi:10.1016/S0022-4405(97)00050-2. Cotton, Kathleen. New Small Learning Communities: Findings from Recent Literature. Portland: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, 2001. —. Principals and Student Achievement: What the Research Says. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2003. —. “School Size, School Climate, and Student Performance.” Close-Up, No. 20, Series X. School Improvement Research Series, Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, 1996. Creating a Great Place to Learn Survey. Minneapolis: A Survey of School Climate-Search Institute, 2006. Croninger, Robert G. and Valerie E. Lee. “Social Capital and Dropping Out of High School: Benefits to At-Risk Students of Teachers’ Support and Guidance.” Teachers College Record, 103, no. 4 (2001): 548–581. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0161-4681.00127. Culture of Excellence and Ethics Assessment. New York: Manlius, Institute for Excellence and Ethics. Cumaoglu, Kizilkaya and Yelkin Coskun. “The Relationship between Academic Procrastination and Technology Usage of Teachers.” International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkic, 7, no. 4 (2012): 2237-2247. Debnam, Katrina J., Sarah L. Johnson, and Catherine P. Bradshaw. “Examining the Association between Bullying and Adolescent Concerns about Teen Dating Violence.” Journal of School Health, 84, no. 7 (2014): 421-428. dio:10.1111/josh.12170. de Bono, Edward. Lateral Thinking: Creativity Step by Step. New York, Harper and Row, 1970. Dellar, Graham B. “School Climate, School Improvement and Site-Based Management.” Learning Environments Research, 1, no. 3 (1998): 353367. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1009970210393#pa ge-1. DePedro, Kris Tunac, Ron Avi Astor, Tamika D. Gilreath, Rami Benbenishty, and Ruth Berkowitz. “School Climate, Deployment, and Mental Health Among Students in Military-Connected Schools.” Youth Society, June 30, 2015. doi:10.1177/0044118. Dewey, John. Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1916.

The Psychology of School Climate

229

—. “My Pedagogic Creed.” School Journal, 54 (1897): 77-80. http://dewey.pragmatism.org/creed.htm. Digest of Education Statistics. United States National Center for Educational Statistics, January 2001. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/. Ding, Cody, Ying Liu, and Marvin Berkowitz. “The Study of Factor Structure and Reliability of an Abbreviated School Climate Survey.” Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 26, no. 3 (2011): 241-256. doi:10.1177/0829573511414005. DiStefano, Christine, Diane M. Monrad, J. May, Patricia McGuinness, and Tammiee Dickenson. “Using School Climate Surveys to Categorize Schools and Examine Relationships with School Achievement.” Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, April, 2007. Duggins, Shaun D., Gabriel P. Kuperminc, Christopher C. Henrich, Ciara Smalls-Glover, and Julia L. Perilla. “Aggression among Adolescent Victims of School Bullying: Protective Roles of Family and School Connectedness.” Psychology of Violence, June 15, 2015. doi.org/10.1037/a0039439. Dunlap, Glen, Rose Iovannone, Kelly J. Wilson, Donald K. Kincaid, and Phillip Strain. “Prevent-Teach-Reinforce: A Standardized Model of School-Based Behavioral Intervention.” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12 (2010): 9-22. doi:10.1177/1098300708330880. Durkheim, Emile. Moral Education: A Study in the Theory and Application of the Sociology of Education, trans. by Everett K. Wilson and Henry Schnurer. New York: The Free Press, 1961. Dynarski, Mark, Linda Clarke, Brian Cobb, Jeremy Finn, Russell Rumberger, and Jay Smink. Dropout Prevention. Institute of Education Sciences Practice Guide, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, 2008-4025, 2008. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/dp_pg_090308.pdf. Eber, Lucille, Teri Lewis-Palmer, and Debra Pacchiano. “School-wide Positive Behavior Systems: Improving School Environments for All Students Including Those with EBD.” Paper presented at the System of Care for Children’s Mental Health Conference, Tampa, February 2002. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/ERIC-ED465253/pdf/ERICED465253.pdf. Ecclestone, R.A. An Application of the Finlayson School Climate Scales to Four Seventh-Day Adventist Secondary Schools. Avondale College: University of New England, 1978. Elias, Maurice J. “School Climate that Promotes Student Voice.” Principal Leadership, 11, no. 1 (2010): 22-27.

230

References

http://www.nassp.org/Content.aspx?topic=School_Climate_That_Prom otes_Student_Voice Eliot, Megan, Dewey Cornell, Anne Gregory, and Xitao Fan. “Supportive School Climate and Student Willingness to Seek Help for Bullying and Threats of Violence.” Journal of School Psychology, 48, no. 6 (2010): 533-553. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2010.07.001. Epstein, Joyce L. and James M. McPartland. Family and School Interactions and Main Effects on Affective Outcomes, Report No. 235. Washington, D.C.: John Hopkins University Center for the Study of Social Organization of Schools, National Institute of Education, 1976. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED151713.pdf. Ertesvag, Sigrun K. and Erling Roland. “Professional Cultures and Rates of Bullying.” School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 26, no. 2 (2014): 195-214. doi:10.1080/09243453.2014.944547. Ervasti, Jenni, Mika Kivimaki, Riikka Puusniekka, Pauliina Luopa, Jaana Pentti, Sakari Suominen, Kirsi Ahola, Jussi Vahtera, and Marianna Virtanen. “Students’ School Satisfaction as Predictor of Teachers’ Sickness Absence: A Prospective Cohort Study.” European Journal of Public Health, 22, no. 2 (2014): 422-427. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckr043. Espelage, Dorothy L. Joshua R. Polanin, and Sabina K. Low. “Teacher and Staff Perceptions of School Environment as Predictors of Student Aggression, Victimization, and Willingness to Intervene in Bullying Situations.” School Psychology Quarterly, 29, no. 3 (2014): 287-305. doi:10.1037/spq0000072. Evans, Ian M., Shane T. Harvey, Laura Buckley, and Elizabeth Yan. “Differentiating Classroom Climate Concepts: Academic, Management, and Emotional Environments.” New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences, 4, no. 2 (2009): 131-146. doi:10.1080/1177083X.2009.9522449. Evenson, Kelly R., Robert W. Motl, Amanda S. Birnbaum, and Dianne S. Ward. “Measurement of Perceived School Climate for Active Travel in Children.” American Journal of Health Behavior, 31, no.1 (2007): 8697. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5993/AJHB.31.1.9. Fagan, Abigail, M. Lee Van Horn, J. David Hawkins, and Michael Arthur. “Using Community and Family Risk and Protective Factors for Community-Based Prevention Planning.” Journal of Community Psychology, 35, no. 4 (2007): 535-555. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/J_Hawkins/publication/22772137 2_Using_community_and_family_risk_and_protective_factors_for_co mmunitybased_prevention_planning/links/0c960518c5e903c83600000 0.pdf.

The Psychology of School Climate

231

Faulkner, Guy E., Edward M. Adlaf, Hyacinth M. Irving, Kenneth R. Allison, and John Dwyer. “School Disconnectedness: Identifying Adolescents at Risk in Ontario, Canada.” Journal of School Health, 79 (2009): 312-318. doi: 10.1111/j.1746-1561.2009.00415.x. Felitti, Vincent J., Robert F. Anda, Dale Nordenberg, David F. Williamson, Alison M. Spitz, Valerie Edwards, Mary P. Koss, James S. Marks. “Relationship of Childhood Abuse and Household Dysfunction to Many of the Leading Causes of Death in Adults: The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study.” American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 14, no. 4 (1998): 245-258. http://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(98)000178/fulltext?refuid=S0266-6138(11)00071-4&refissn=0266-6138. Felner, Robert D., Melanie Ginter, and Judith Primavera. “Primary Prevention during School Transitions: Social Support and Environment Structure.” American Journal of Community Psychology, 10, no. 3 (1982): 277-290. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-14419-8646-7_9#page-1. Ferrans, Silvia D. and Robert L. Selman. “How Students’ Perceptions of the School Climate Influence Their Choice to Upstand, Bystand, or Join Perpetrators of Bullying.” Harvard Educational Review, 84, no. 2 (2014):162-187. doi:10.17763/haer.84.2.h488313410l651mm. Ferguson, R.F. The TRIPOD Project Framework. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 2008. http://www.staffordschools.org/cms/lib2/NJ01001734/Centricity/Doma in/24/Student%20Survey.pdf. Filardo, Mary. “Good Buildings, Better Schools: An Economic Stimulus Opportunity with Long-Term Benefits.” Briefing Paper 216, Economic Policy Institute, April 29, 2008. http://www.gpn.org/bp216/bp216.pdf. Flake, Eric M., Beth Ellen Davis, Patti L. Johnson, and Laura S. Middleton. “The Psychosocial Effects of Deployment on Military Children.” Journal of Developmental Pediatrics, 30, no. 4 (2009): 271-278. https://reachmilitaryfamilies.umn.edu/sites/.../Flake,%20E.%202009.p df. Fox, L. and D.P. Binder. Getting Preschool Classrooms on Board with PBIS. University of South Florida, Florida Center for Inclusive Communities, August, 2015. Franceschini III, L.A. Convergent Validity Study of the School Climate Inventory (SCI) Using Archived Tennessee Department of Education Indicators. Memphis: Center for Research in Educational Policy, 2009. Fraser, Barry J. and Darrell L. Fisher. “Predicting Students’ Outcomes from Their Perceptions of Classroom Psychosocial Environment.”

232

References

American Educational Research Journal, 19, no. 4 (1982b): 498-518. doi:10.3102/00028312019004498. Fraser, Barry J., John G. Docker, and Darrell L Fisher. “Assessing and Improving School Climate.” Evaluation and Research in Education, 2, no. 3 (1988): 109-122. doi:10.1080/09500798809533248. Fraser, Mark W. “Risk and Resilience in Childhood: An Ecological Perspective.” Paper presented at the National Association of School Social Workers Conference, Washington, D.C, 1997. Freiburg, Jerome. School Climate: Measuring, Improving and Sustaining Healthy Learning Environments. Philadelphia: Routledge-Falmer, Taylor and Francis Group, 1999. Gadin, Katja Gillander. “Do Changes in the Psychosocial School Environment Influence Pupils’ Health Development? Results from a ThreeYear Follow-Up Study.” Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 31, no. 3 (2003): 169-177. doi:10.1080/14034940210134121. Gendron, Brian P., Kirk R. Williams, and Nancy G. Guerra. “An Analysis of Bullying among Students within Schools: Estimating the Effects of Individual Normative Beliefs, Self-Esteem, and School Climate.” Journal of School Violence, 10, no. 2 (2011): 150-164. doi:10.1080/15388220.2010.539166. Gilliam, Walter S. and Golan Shahar. “Preschool and Child Care Expulsion and Suspension: Rates and Predictors in One State.” Infants and Young Children, 19, no. 3 (2006): 228-245. Gilstad-Hayden, Kathryn, Amy Carroll-Scott, Lisa Rosenthal, Susan M. Peters, Catherine McCaslin, and Jeannette R. Ickovics. “Positive School Climate is Associated with Lower Body Mass Index Percentile among Urban Preadolescents.” Journal of School Health, 84, no. 8 (2014): 502-506. doi:10.1111/josh.12177. Giovazolias, Theodoros, Elias Kourkoutas, Effrosyni Mitsopoulou, and Maria Georgiadi. “The Relationship between Perceived School Climate and the Prevalence of Bullying Behavior in Greek Schools: Implications for Preventive Inclusive Strategies.” Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5 (2010): 2208-2215. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.437. Gislason, Neil. “Mapping School Design: A Qualitative Study of the Relations among Facilities Design, Curriculum Delivery, and School Climate.” The Journal of Environmental Education, 40, no. 4 (2009): 1734. http://online.tarleton.edu/ACEF/ACEFJournalVolume3Issue2/index.ht ml#/26/.

The Psychology of School Climate

233

Glaser, Barney and Anselm Strauss. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York, Aldine de Gruyter Publishers, 1967. Glover, Veronica. “A Study of the Influence of Leadership Competencies on a School Culture Organization.” Dissertation, Pepperdine University, 2015. http://pepperdine.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15093coll2/i d/543. Goh, Swee Chiew Deidra J. Young, and Barry J. Fraser. “Psychosocial Climate and Student Outcomes in Elementary Mathematics Classrooms: A Multilevel Analysis.” The Journal of Experimental Education, 64, no. 1 (Fall 1995): 29-40. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20152470. Goldstein, Sara E., Amy Young, and Carol Boyd. “Relational Aggression at School: Associations with School Safety and Social Climate.” Journal of Youth Adolescence, 37 (2008): 641-654. doi:10.1007/s10964007-9192-4. Goleman, Daniel. Emotional Intelligence. New York, Bantam Books, 1995. Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 1975. Grayson, Jessica L. and Heather K Alvarez. “School Climate Factors Relating to Teacher Burnout: A Mediator Model.” Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, no. 5 (2008): 1349-1363. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2007.06.005. Gregiore, Michele and James Algina. “Reconceptualizing the Debate on School Climate and Students’ Academic Motivation and Achievement: A Multilevel Analysis.” Paper presented at the American Research Council Annual Conference, New Orleans, LA, 2000. Gregory, Anne, Dewey Cornell, Xitao Fan, Peter Sheras, Tse-Hua Shih, and Francis Huang. “Authoritative School Discipline: High School Practices Associated with Lower Bullying and Victimization.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, no. 2 (2010): 483-496. Greenleaf, Robert K. The Servant as Leader. Indianapolis: Robert K. Greenleaf Center, 1977. Griffith, James. “School Climate as Social Order and Social Action: A Multi-Level Analysis of Public Elementary School Student Perceptions.” School Psychology of Education, 2, no. 3 (1999): 339-369. doi:10.1023/A:1009657422344. Griffith, James. “School Climate as Group Evaluation and Group Consensus: Student and Parent Perceptions of the Elementary School Environment.” The Elementary School Journal, 101, no. 1 (2000): 35-61.

234

References

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1002334. Guardino, Caroline and Shirin D. Antia. “Modifying the Classroom Environment to Increase and Decrease Disruption with Students Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing.” Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 17, no. 4 (2012): 518-533. doi:10.1093/deafed/ens026. Guo, Ping, Josephine Choe, and Ann Higgins-D’Alessandro. “Report of Construct Validity and Internal Consistency Findings for the Comprehensive School Climate Inventory.” Fordham University, 2011. https://www.schoolclimate.org/climate/documents/Fordham_Univ_CS CI_development_review_2011.pdf. Hall, Calvin S. Review of “A Dynamic Theory of Personality,” by Kurt Lewin, American Journal of Psychology, 48, no. 2 (1936). doi:10.2307/1415758. Hanna, James W. “School Climate: Changing Fear to Fun.” Contemporary Education, 69, no. 2 (1998): 83-85. Hanson, Thomas and Adam Voight. The Appropriateness of a California Student and Staff Survey for Measuring Middle School Climate. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, 2014. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/west/pdf/REL_2014039.pdf. Harper, Kristine M. “Teacher Perceptions of the Use of School-Wide Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports at Reducing the Presence of Bullying in Middle Schools.” Dissertation, The University of Southern Mississippi, 2015. http://aquila.usm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1121&context=disse rtations. Harrington, David M. “Conditions and Settings/Environment.” In Encyclopedia of Creativity, Volume I, Ed. By Steven R. Pritzker (1999): 323-341. Hart, Betty and Todd R. Risley. Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children. Baltimore, Brooks Publishing Company, 1995. Hawkins, James D. and Richard Catalano. Communities That Care Youth Survey. University of Washington Social Development Research Group, 2010. Haynes, Norris, James P. Comer, and Muriel Hamilton-Lee. “School Climate Enhancement through Parental Involvement.” Journal of School Psychology, 27, no. 1 (1989): 87-90. doi:10.1016/0022-4405(89)90034-4. Heider, Fritz. Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1958).

The Psychology of School Climate

235

Hemphill, Sheryl A., John W. Toumbourou, Todd I. Herrenkohl, Barbara J. McMorris, and Richard F. Catalano. “The Effect of School Suspensions and Arrests on Subsequent Adolescent Antisocial Behavior in Australia and the United States.” Journal of Adolescent Health, 39, no. 5 (2006): 736-744. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.05.010. Hemphill, Sheryl A., Todd I. Herrenkohl, Stephanie M. Plenty, John W. Toumbourou, Richard F. Catalano, and Barbara J. McMorris. “Pathways from School Suspension to Adolescent Nonviolent Antisocial Behavior in Students in Victoria, Australia and Washington State, United States.” Journal of Community Psychology, Volume 40, Issue 3 (2012): 301-318. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3774047/. Hennekens, Charles H. and Julie E. Buring. Epidemiology in Medicine. Boston, Little, Brown, and Company, 1987. Hennessey, Beth A. Developing Creativity Gifted Children: The Central Importance of Motivation and Classroom Climate. Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, 2004. Hernandez, Emily Jo. “Promising Practices for Preventing Bullying in K12 Schools: Student Engagement.” Dissertation, University of Southern California, 2014. Hesse, Hermann. Journey to the East. Germany: Samuel Fischer Publishing, 1932. Higgins-D’Alessandro, Ann, D. Faster, and Jonathan Cohen. School Growth and Change: A Report Comparing Schools in 2007 and 2010. Fordham University and the National School Climate Center. Ho, Esther Sui Chu. “Effect of School Decentralization and School Climate on Student Mathematics Performance: The Case of Hong Kong.” Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 4, no.1 (2005): 47-64. doi:10.1007/s10671-005-1546-7. Hockenbury, Don H. and Sandra E. Hockenbury, Discovering Psychology, 5th ed. New York: MacMillan, 2010. Hoge, Dean R., Edna K. Smit, and Sandra L. Hanson. “School Experiences Predicting Changes in Self-Esteem of Sixth and Seventh Grade Students.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, no. 1 (1990): 117-127. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.117. Hopson, Laura M., Kathryn S. Schiller, and Hal A. Lawson. “Exploring Linkages Between School Climate, Behavioral Norms, Social Supports, and Academic Success.” Social Work Research, 38, no. 4 (2014): 197-209. Doi:10.1093/swr/svu017. Horner, Robert H., Lassen, Stephen T., Michael M. Steele, and Wayne Sailor. “The Relationship of School-wide Positive Behavioral Support

236

References

to Academic Achievement in an Urban Middle School.” Psychology in the Schools, 43, no. 6 (2006): 701-712. doi:10.1002/pits.20177. Hoy, Wayne, K. The Organizational Climate Description for Elementary Schools. Ohio State University, Department of Education, 1972. Hoy, Wayne, K., and Anita E. Woolfolk. “Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy and the Organizational Health of Schools.” The Elementary School Journal, 93, no. 4 (1993): 355-372. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1002017. Hoy, Wayne, K., and James E. Henderson. “Principal Authenticity, School Climate, and Pupil-Control Orientation,” Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 29, no. 2 (1983): 123-130. Hoy, Wayne, K., and John A. Fedman. “Organizational Health: The Concept and Its Measure.” Journal of Research and Development in Education, 20 (1987): 417-435. Hoy, Wayne, K., John C. Tarter, and Robert B. Kottkamp. Open Schools/Healthy Schools. Newbury Park: Sage Publications, 1991. Hoy, Wayne, K., Scott R. Sweetland, and Page A. Smith. “Toward an Organizational Model of Achievement in High Schools: The Significance of Collective Efficacy.” Educational Administration Quarterly, 38, no. 1 (2002): 77-93. doi:10.1177/0013161X02381004. Hudley, Cynthia, Annette Daoud, Ted Planco, Rosina Wright-Castro, and Rachel Herschberg. “Student Engagement, School Climate, and Future Expectations in High School.” Paper presented at the Society for Research in Child Development Biennial Meeting, Tampa, Florida, 2003. Hung, Anna H., Aaron M. Luebbe, Paul D. and Flaspohler. “Measuring School Climate: Factor Analysis and Relations to Emotional Problems, Conduct Problems, and Victimization in Middle School Students.” School Mental Health, 7 (2015): 105-119. Hunter, Samuel T., Katrina E. Bedell, and Michael D. Mumford. “Climate for Creativity: A Quantitative Review.” Creativity Research Journal, 19, no. 1 (2007): 69-90. doi:10.1080/10400410709336883. James, Lawrence R. and Allen P. Jones. “Organizational Climate: A Review of Theory and Research.” Psychological Bulletin, 81, no.12 (1974): 1096-1112. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0037511. James, William. The Principles of Psychology. Dover Publications, 1892. Jensen, Eric. “A Descriptive Study of Differences between Teachers at High and Low Performing Title I Elementary Schools.” Dissertation, Fielding Graduate University, 2014. Jeong, Seokjin, Jaya Davis, and Youngsun Han. “Who Becomes More Violent among Korean Adolescents? Consequences of Victimization in School.” Criminal Behavior and Mental Health, 25, no. 2 (2014): 141155. doi:10.1002/cbm.1919.

The Psychology of School Climate

237

Jia, Yueming, Niobe Way, Guangming Ling, Hirokazu Yoshikawa, Xinyin Chen, Diane Hughes, Xiaoyan Ke, and Zuhong Lu. “The Influence of Student Perceptions of School Climate on Social Emotional and Academic Adjustment: A Comparison of Chinese and American Adolescents.” Child Development, 80, no. 5 (2009): 1514-1530. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01348.x. Johnson, Leah E., Eugene W. Wang, Zhaomin He, Clint Carpenter, C. Michael Nelson, and Brenda K. Scheuermann. “Youth Outcomes Following Implementation of Universal SWPBIS in a Texas Secure Juvenile Facility.” Education and Treatment of Children, 36, no. 3 (2013): 135-145. Johnson, Sarah Lindstrom, Elise Pas, and Catherine P. Bradshaw. “Understanding the Association between School Climate and Future Orientation.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence, June 24, 2015 online. doi:10.1007/s10964-0150321-1. Jolivette, Kristine, Nicole C. Swoszowski, and Robin P. Ennis. “PBIS as Prevention for High-Risk Youth in Alternative Education, Residential, and Juvenile Justice Settings.” Education and Treatment of Children, 36, no. 3, (2013): 1-2. doi:10.1353/etc.2013.0027. Juvonen, Janna, Vi-Nhuan Le, Tessa Kaganoff, Catherine H. Augustine, and Louay Constant. Focus on the Wonder Years: Challenges Facing the American Middle School. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation, 2004.https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2004/ RAND_MG139.pdf. Kasen, Stephanie N., Jim Johnson, and Patricia Cohen. “The Impact of Social Emotional Climate on Student Psychopathology. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 18, no. 2 (1990): 165-177. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00910728#page-1. Kelly, E.A., J.A. Glover, J.W. Keefe, C. Halderson, C. Sorenson, and C. Speth. School Climate Scale (Modified). Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals, 1986. Kelm, Joanna L., Kent McIntosh, and Sharon Cooley. “Effects of Implementing School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on Problem Behavior and Academic Achievement in a Canadian Elementary School.” Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 29 (2014): 155-160. doi:10.1177/0829573514540266. Khmelkov, Vladimir T. and Matthew L. Davidson. Culture of Ethics and Excellence Assessment Student and Faculty/Staff Survey Psychometric Data: High School Sample. New York: Manlius, Institute for Excellence and Ethics, 2011.

238

References

Khmelkov, Vladimir T., Matthew L. Davidson, Kyle Baker, Tom Lickona, and Rich Parisi. Survey Components and Scale Matrix. New York: Manlius, Institute for Excellence and Ethics, 2011. http://www.excellenceandethics.com/assess/CEEA_v4.5_matrix.pdf. Kids Count Data Book 2014. Kids Count Data Center: A Project of the Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2014. http://www.aecf.org/m/resourcedoc/aecf-2014kidscountdatabook2014.pdf. Kiremitch, Olcay, R. Timucin Gencer, Erdinc Demiray, and Volkan Unutmaz. “An Investigation on Work-Related Behaviors and Perceptions of School Quality Management Culture of K-12 Teachers.” Anthropologist, 18, no. 1 (2014): 165-170. http://www.krepublishers.com/02Journals/T-Anth/Anth-18-0-000-14-Web/Anth-18-1-000-14-AbstPDF/T-ANTH-18-1-165-14-1050-Kiremitci-O/T-ANTH-18-1-165-141050-Kiremitci-O-Tx[16].pdf. Klem, Adena M. and James P. Connell. “Relationships Matter: Linking Teacher Support to Student Engagement and Achievement.” Journal of School Health, 74, no. 7 (2004): 262–273. http://www.irre.org/sites/default/files/publication_pdfs/Klem_and_Con nell_2004_JOSH_article.pdf. Kuperminic, Gabriel P., Bonnie J. Leadbeater, Christine Emmons, and Sidney J. Blatt. “Perceived School Climate and Difficulties in the Social Adjustment of Middle School Students.” Applied Developmental Science, 1 (1997): 76-88. doi:10.1207/s1532480xads0102_2. Kuperminic, Gabriel P., Bonnie J. Leadbeater, and Sidney J. Blatt. “School Social Climate and Individual Differences in Vulnerability to Psychopathology among Middle School Students.” Journal of School Psychology, 39, no. 2 (2001): 141-159. doi:10.1016/S0022-4405(01)00059-0. Lair, Susan B. “A Study of the Effect School Facility Conditions Have on Student Achievement.” Dissertation, University of Texas, Austin, 2003. http://hdl.handle.net/2152/12191. Lampron, Stephanie and Simon Gonsoulin. “PBIS in Restrictive Settings: The Time is Now.” Education and Treatment of Children, 36, no. 3 (2013): 161-174. doi:10.1353/etc.2013.0023. LaRusso, Maria, Daniel Romer, and Robert L. Selman. “Teachers as Builders of Respectful School Climates: Implications for Adolescent Drug Use Norms and Depressive Symptoms in High School.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37 (2008): 386-398. doi:10.1007/s10964007-9212-4.

The Psychology of School Climate

239

LaSalle, Tamika. “Cultural and Ecological Considerations within the Context of School Climate.” Dissertation, Georgia State University, 2013. LaSalle, Tamika, and J. Freeman, “School Climate Survey Validation Study,” Paper presented at the National PBIS Leadership Conference: Rosemont, 2014. LaSalle, Tamika, F. Zabeck, and J. Meyers (accepted for publication). “Elementary Student Perceptions of School Climate and Associations with Student and School Actors.” School Psychology Forum. LaSalle, Tamika, Joel Meyers, Davis, D., and Georgia Department of Education. (In revision). “School Climate Accountability: Examining the Favor Structure of the Georgia comprehensive School Climate Inventory.” Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia. LaSalle, Tamika, Joel Meyers, Kristen Varjas, and Andrew Roach. “A Cultural-Ecological Model of School Climate,” International Journal of School and Educational Psychology, 3, no. 3 (2015): 157-166. doi:10.1080/21683603.2015.1047550. Lassen, Stephen T., Michael M. Steele, and Wayne Sailor. “The Relationship of School-wide Positive Behavioral Support to Academic Achievement in an Urban Middle School.” Psychology in the Schools, 43, no. 6 (2006): 701-712. doi:10.1002/pits.20177. Leadbeater, Bonnie, Paweena Sukhawathanakul, David Smith, and François Bowern. “Reciprocal Associations between Interpersonal and Values Dimensions of School Climate and Peer Victimization in Elementary School Children.” Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 44, no. 3 (2015): 480-493. doi:10.1080/15374416.2013.873985. LeBlanc, Line, Raymond Swisher, Frank Vitaro, and Richard E. Tremblay. “High School Social Climate and Antisocial Behavior: A 10-Year Longitudinal and Multilevel Study.” Journal of Research on Adolescence, 18, no. 3 (2008): 395-419. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2008.00565.x. Lee Ross, L. “The Intuitive Psychologist and His Shortcomings: Distortions in the Attribution Process.” In Berkowitz, L. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 10 (1977): 173–220. http://web.mit.edu/curhan/www/docs/Articles/15341_Readings/Social_ Cognition/Ross_Intuitive_Psychologist_in_Adv_Experiment_Soc_ Psych_vol10_p173.pdf. Lee, Steven W. Encyclopedia of School Psychology. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2005. Lenzi, Michela, Alessio Vieno, Gianluca Gini, Tiziana Pozzoli, Massimiliano Pastore, Massimo Santinello, and Frank J. Elgar. “Perceived

240

References

Teacher Unfairness, Instrumental Goals, and Bullying Behavior in Early Adolescence.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29, no. 10 (2013): 1834-1849. doi:10.1177/0886260513511694. Lester, Patricia, Kris Peterson, James Reeves, Larry Knauss, Dorie Glover, Catherine Mogil, Naihua Duan, William Saltzman, Robert Pynoos, Katherine Wilt, and William Beardslee. “The Long War and Parental Combat Deployment: Effects on Military Children and At-Home Spouses.” Journal of American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 49, no. 4 (2010): 310-320. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2875082/. Lewin, K. (1936). A Dynamic Theory of Personality. Reviewed by Calvin S. Hall, The American Journal of Psychology, Volume 48, No. 2, 353355. Lewis, Morgan. “Where Children Learn: Facilities Condition and Student Test Performance in Milwaukee Public Schools.” Council of Educational Facility Planners, Scottsdale, Arizona, 2001. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED459593.pdf. Lhamon, Catherine E. Dear Colleague Letter. United States Departments of Education Office of Civil Rights, October 1, 2014. http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleagueresourcecomp-201410.pdf. Lippman, L., A. Moore, K. Guzman, L. Ryberg, H. McIntosh, S. Caal, M. Ramos, A. Carle, and M. Kuhfeld. Flourishing Children: Defining and Testing Indicators of Positive Development. New York: Springer Publications, 2013. Lippman, L., L. Guzman, and K.A. Moore. Measuring Flourishing Among Youth: Findings from the Flourishing Children Positive Indicators Project. Washington, DC: Child Trends, 2012. Liu, John C. The Suspension Spike: Changing the Discipline Culture in NYC’s Middle Schools. New York: New York City Government Report, July 2013. https://comptroller.nyc.gov/wp-content/uploads/ 2013/07/NYC_MiddleSchools_Summary.pdf. Loukas, Alexandra. “What is School Climate?” National Association of Elementary School Principals, Leadership Compass, 5, no. 1 (2007, Fall): 1-3. https://www.naesp.org/resources/2/Leadership_Compass/2007/LC2007 v5n1a4.pdf. Loukas, Alexandra and Sheri Robinson. “Examining the Moderating Role of Perceived School Climate in Early Adolescent Adjustment.” Journal of Research on Adolescence, 14 (2004): 209-233. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2004.01402004.x.

The Psychology of School Climate

241

Loukas, Alexandra, Rie Suzuki, and Karissa Horton. “Examining School Connectedness as a Mediator of School Climate Effects.” Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16, no. 3 (2006): 491-502. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2006.00504.x. Low, Sabina K. and Mark Van Ryzin. “The Moderating Effects of School Climate on Bullying Prevention Efforts.” School Psychology Quarterly, 29, no. 3 (2014): 306-319. doi:10.1037/spq0000073. Lüdtke, Oliver, Herbert W. Marsh, Alexander Robitzsch, Ulrich Trautwein, Tihomir Asparouhov, and Bengt Muthén. “The Multilevel Latent Covariate Model: A New, More Reliable Approach to GroupLevel Effects in Contextual Studies,” Psychological Methods, 13, no. 3 (2008): 203-209. doi:10.1037/a0012869. MacNeil, Angus, Doris Prater, and Steve Busch. “The Effects of School Culture and Climate on Student Achievement.” International Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory and Practice, 12, no. 1 (2009): 7384. http://donnieholland.wiki.westga.edu/file/view/school+culture+climate +%26+achievement.pdf. Marsh, Louise, Rob McGee, and Sheila Williams. “School Climate and Aggression among New Zealand High School Students.” New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 43, no. 1 (2014): 28-36. Martin, Beverly Ann. “An Exploration into the Effects of School Discipline Policies on the Academic Performance of African-American Male Students.” Dissertation, California State University, 2014. http://cdmweb.lib.csufresno.edu/cdm/ref/collection/thes/id/125009. Mass-Galloway, Robin L., Marion V. Panyan, Carl R. Smith, and Suana Wessendorf. “Systems Change with School-Wide Positive Behavior Supports: Iowa’s Work in Progress.” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10, no. 2 (2008): 129-135. doi:10.1177/1098300707312545. Matsumra, Lindsay Clare, Sharon Cadman Slater, and Amy Crosson. “Classroom Climate, Rigorous Instruction and Curriculum, and Students' Interactions in Urban Middle Schools.” The Elementary School Journal, 108, no. 4 (2008): 293-312. doi:10.1086/528973. Mattison, Erica and Mark Aber. “Closing the Achievement Gap: The Association of Racial Climate with Achievement and Behavioral Outcomes.” American Journal of Community Psychology, 40, no. 1-2 (2007): 1-12. doi:10.1007/s10464-007-9128-x. McEvoy, Alan and Robert Welker. “Antisocial Behavior, Academic Failure, and School Climate: A Critical Review.” Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8, no. 3 (2000): 130-140.

242

References

doi: 10.1177/106342660000800301. McGiboney, Garry. “Attribution of Educators and Non-Educators about Student Misbehavior” Dissertation, Georgia State University, 1985. McGiboney, Garry, and Dennis Kramer. “The Relationship between School Climate and Student Achievement.” Paper presented at the Youth Issues Summit, Callaway Gardens, March 9, 2012. McIntosh, Kent, Larissa K. Predy, Gita Upreti, Amanda E. Hume, Mary G. Turri, and Susanna Mathews. “Perceptions of Contextual Features Related to Implementation and Sustainability of School-wide Positive Behavior Support.” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 16 (2013): 29-41. doi:10.1177/1098300712470723. McKinney, Sueanne E., Gloria D. Campbell-Whately, and Cathy D. Kea. “Managing Student Behavior in Urban Classrooms: The Role of Teacher ABC Assessments.” The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues, and Ideas, 79, no. 1 (2005): 16–20. doi:10.3200/TCHS.79.1.16-20. Meristo, Merilyn and Eve Eisenschmidt. “Novice Teachers’ Perceptions of School Climate and Self-Efficacy.” International Journal of Educational Research, 67(2014): 1-10. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2014.04.003. Michael, John A. “High School Climates and Plans for Entering College.” The Public Opinion Quarterly, 25, no. 4 (1961): 585-595. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2746294. Milner, Karen and Hariett Khoza. “A Comparison of Teacher Stress and School Climate Across Schools with Different Matric Success Rates.” South African Journal of Education, 28 (2008): 155-173. Mineo, Frank P. “An Examination of the Relationship between Leadership Styles and Organizational Sector Culture for the Emergency Medical Services Leader.” Doctoral thesis, Capella University, 2009. Mitchell, Mary M., Catherine P. Bradshaw, and Philip J. Leaf. “Student and Teacher Perceptions of School Climate: A Multilevel Exploration of Patterns of Discrepancy.” Journal of School Health, 80, no. 6 (2010): 271-279. http://donnieholland.wiki.westga.edu/file/view/Student%26Teacher+pe rception+of+school+climate.pdf/349266918/Student%26Teacher+ perception+of+school+climate.pdf. Modin, Bitte and Viveca Ostberg. “School Climate and Psychosomatic Health: A Multilevel Analysis.” School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 20, no. 4 (2009): 433-455. doi:10.1080/09243450903251507. Molloy, L.E., Julia E. Moore, Jessica Trail, John James Van Epps, and Suellen Hopfer. “Understanding Real-World Implementation Quality

The Psychology of School Climate

243

and Active Ingredients of PBIS.” Prevention Science, 14, no. 6 (2013): 593-605. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4032114/. Montgomery, N. CCSR 5 Essentials Survey–2007 Scoring Sample. Unpublished memo referenced in Safe Supportive Learning–American Institutes for Research, 2010. Moolenaar, Nienke, Alan J. Daly, and Peter J. C. Sleegers. “Occupying the Principal Position: Examining Relationships between Transformational Leadership, Social Network Position, and Schools’ Innovative Climate.” Educational Administration Quarterly, 46, no. 5 (2010): 623633. doi:10.1177/0013161X10378689. Moore, K.A. and L. Lippman. Flourishing Children Survey of Social Competence. Bethesda: Child Trends, 2011. https://safesupportivelearning.ed.gov/survey/flourishing-childrensurvey-social-competence. Moos, Rudolph H. Work Environment Scale. Sunnyvale: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1987. Moos, Rudolph H., and Bernice S. Moos. “Classroom Social Climate and Student Absences and Grades.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, no. 2 (1978): 263-269. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.70.2.263. Mowday, Richard T., Richard M. Steers, and Lyman W. Porter. “The Measurement of Organizational Commitment.” Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14 (1979): 224-247. doi:10.1016/0001-8791(79)90072-1. Muscott, Howard S., Eric L. Mann, and Marcel R. LeBrun. “Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports in New Hampshire: Effects of Large-Scale Implementation of School-Wide Positive Behavior Support on Student Discipline and Academic Achievement.” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10, no. 3 (2008): 190-205. doi:10.1177/1098300708316258. Narhi, Vesa, Tiina Kiiski, Satu Peitso, and Hannu Savolainen. “Reducing Disruptive Behaviors and Improving Learning Climates with ClassWide Positive Behavior Support in Middle Schools.” European Journal of Special Needs Education, 30, no. 2 (2014): 274-285. Nathanson, Lori, Meghan McCormick, James J. Kemple, and Lauren Sypek. Strengthening Assessments of School Climate: Lessons from the NYC School Survey. New York: Research Alliance for New York City Schools, 2013. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED543180.pdf. National Center for Educational Statistics. Public School Safety and Discipline: 2013-2014. Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Education, 2013. National Dropout Prevention Center. (2013). Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina. http://dropoutprevention.org/.

244

References

National School Climate Center. What is School Climate and Why is it Important? New York: NSCC, 2015. www.schoolclimate.org. Neilsen-Gatti, Shelley and Lynn Stansberry-Brusnahan, R. Nelson, and C. Ryan. “Strategies for Increasing Parental Involvement in School-Wide Positive Behavioral Support Initiatives.” Nusser, Janie L. and Emil J. Haller. “Alternative Perceptions of a School’s Climate: Do Principals, Students and Teachers Agree?” Paper presented at the American Research Council Annual Conference, San Francisco, April 18, 1995. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED390138.pdf. O’Donnell, Deborah A., William C. Roberts, and Mary E. Schwab-Stone. “Community Violence Exposure and Post-Traumatic Stress Reactions among Gambian Youth: The Moderating Role of Parents and School.” Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 46, no. 1 (2011): 5967. doi:10.1007/s00127-009-0162-x. Ogbonna, Emmanuel and Lloyd C. Harris. “Leadership Style, Organizational Culture and Performance: Empirical Evidence from UK Companies.” International Journal of Human Resource Management, 11, no. 4 (2000): 766-788. doi:10.1080/09585190050075114. O’Malley, Meagan, Adam Voight, Tyler L. Renshaw, and Katie Eklund. “School Climate, Family Structure, and Academic Achievement: A Study of Moderation Effects.” School Psychology Quarterly, 30, no. 1 (2014): 142-157. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tyler_Renshaw/publication/2646 28273_School_Climate_Family_Structure_and_Academic_Achieveme nt_A_Study_of_Moderation_Effects/links/54cf14b60cf24601c092c8e7 .pdf. O’Neill, David John. “The Impact of School Facilities on Student Achievement, Behavior, Attendance, and Teacher Turnover Rate at Selected Texas Middle Schools in Region XIII ESC.” Dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station, 2000. Osher, David. American Institutes for Research’s 2007 Conditions for Learning Survey. Unpublished memo, American Institutes for Research, 2011. Osher, David, Elizabeth Spier, Kimberly Kendziora, and Cindy Cai.“Improving Academic Achievement through Improving School Climate and Student Connectedness.” Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Conference, San Diego, CA, 2009. Osher, David, Kimberly Kendziora, and Marjorie Chinen. Student Connection Research: Final Narrative Report to the Spencer Foundation. Washington, D.C., 2008.

The Psychology of School Climate

245

http://www.air.org/sites/default/files/downloads/report/Spencer_final_r eport_3_31_08_0.pdf. Ouchi, William. Making Schools Work: A Revolutionary Plan to Get Your Children the Education They Need. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2008. Ozden, Y. Educational Transformation: New Paradigms in Education. Ankara: PegemA, 2000. Pabayo, Roman, Michel Janosz, Sherri Bisset, and Ichiro Kawachi. “School Social Fragmentation, Economic Deprivation, and Social Cohesion and Adolescent Physical Inactivity: A Longitudinal Study.” PLOS One, 9, no. 6 (2014): e99154. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.099154. Parcel, Guy S., Cheryl L. Perry, Steven H. Kelder, John P. Elder, Paul D. Mitchell, Leslie A. Lytle, Carolyn C. Johnson, and Elaine J. Stone. “School Climate and the Institutionalization of the CATCH Program.” Health Education and Behavior, 30, no. 4 (2003): 489-502. doi:10.1177/1090198103253650. Pashiardis, Georgia. “Toward a Knowledge Base for School Climate in Cyprus Schools.” International Journal of Educational Management, 22, no. 5 (2008): 399-416. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513540810883140. Patrick, J.E. “Correlation between Administrative Style and School Climate.” EDRS, Accession Number ED387853, 1995, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED387853.pdf. Payne, Charles M. “I Don’t Want Your Nasty Pot of Gold: Urban School Climate and Public Policy.” Northwestern University, Evanston: Institute for Policy Research, 1997. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED412313.pdf. Peal, Christopher. “In the Real World: The Big-ness of School Climate.” Leadership Compass, 5, no. 1 (2007): 1-2. Pellerin, Lisa A. “Urban Youth and Schooling: The Effect of School Climate on Student Disengagement and Dropout.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, April 24, 2000. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED441883.pdf. Perez, Maria P. “An Analytical Study of School Climate and Principal Leadership.” Dissertation, Johnson and Wales University, 2015. http://scholarsarchive.jwu.edu/dissertations/AAI3704512. Perry, Arthur C. The Management of a City School. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1908.

246

References

Pettigrew, Thomas F. and Linda R. Tropp. “A Meta-Analytic Test of Intergroup Contact Theory.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, no. 5 (2006): 751-783. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751. Phi Delta Kappa International. The 2013 PDK/Gallup Poll on Public Schools. Bloomington: Delta Kappa International, 2013. Porteous, Murray A. and Eilleen Kelleher, “School Climate Differences and Problem Admission in Secondary Schools,” British Journal of Guidance and Counseling, 15 (1987): 72-81. doi:10.1080/03069888708251645. Porter, Ann W., Donald K. Lemon, and Richard G. Landry. “School Climate and Administrative Power Strategies of Elementary School Principals.” Psychological Reports, 65 (1989): 1267-1271. doi:10.2466/pr0.1989.65.3f.1267. Pretorius, Stephanus and Elsabe de Villiers. “Educators’ Perceptions of School Climate and Health in Selected Primary Schools.” South African Journal of Education, 29, no. 1 (2009): 88-99. doi:10.1590/S0256-01002009000100003. Promoting Social and Emotional Learning (1997). Collaborative to Advance Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL). Pulay, Alana S. “The Impact of the Correlated Color Temperature of Fluorescent Lighting and Its Influence on Student On-Task Behavior in an Elementary School Classroom.” Dissertation, Oregon State University, Corvallis, 2015. http://hdl.handle.net/1957/56296. Purkey, Stewart C. and Marshall S. Smith. “Effective Schools: A Review.” The Elementary School Journal, 83, no. 4 (1983): 426-452. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1001168. Quinn, Mary M., Jeffrey M. Poirier, Susan E. Faller, Robert A. Gable, and Steven W. Tonelson. “An Examination of School Climate in Effective Alternative Programs.” Preventing School Failure, 51, no. 1 (2006): 11-17. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Gable/publication/254347 223_An_Examination_of_School_Climate_in_Effective_Alternative_P rograms/links/00b4953b5a0aad8a55000000.pdf#page=11. Rafferty, Alannah E. and Dennis M. Rose. “An Examination of the Relationship Among Extent of Workplace Change, Employee Participation, and Workplace Distress.” In W. Noble (Ed.), Australian Journal of Psychology 2001 Supplement–combined abstracts of 2001 Australian Psychology Conferences, Volume 53 (2002): 85. Raman, Arumugan, Chang Chi Ling, and Rozalind Khalid. “Relationship Between School Climate and Teachers’ Commitment in an Excellent

The Psychology of School Climate

247

School of Kubang Pasu District, Kedah, Malaysia.” Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6, no. 3 (2015): 163-173. doi:10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n3s1p163. Read, Nicholas and Stephanie Lampron. “Supporting Student Achievement through Sound Behavior Management Practices in Schools and Juvenile Justice Facilities: A Spotlight on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS).” Washington, D.C., The National Evaluation and Technical Assistance Center, 2012. http://www.neglecteddelinquent.org/sites/default/files/docs/SupportingStudentAchieve ment.pdf. Reichers, E. and Benjamin Schneider. Climate and Culture: An Evolution of Constructs.” In Benjamin Schneider (Ed.) Organizational Climate and Culture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990. Reid, Robert J., N. Andrew Peterson, Joseph Hughey, and Pauline GarciaReid. “School Climate and Adolescent Drug Use: Mediating Effects of Violence Victimization in the Urban High School Context.” The Journal of Primary Prevention, Volume 27 (2006): 281-292. doi:10.1007/s10935-006-0035-y. Reynolds, Heather, Diann Irwin, and Bob Algozzine. North Carolina Positive Behavior Initiative Evaluation Report 2007-2008. Charlotte, Department of Public Instruction, Exceptional Children Division, Behavioral Support Services, 2009. https://www.pbis.org/common/cms/files/pbisresources/ncevaluationrep ort07_08.pdf. Rockoff, Jonah E. and Lesley J. Turner. “Short-Run Impacts of Accountability on School Quality.” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2, no. 4 (2-10): 119-147. http:www.nber.org/papers/w14564. Roderiguez, S. Anne. “Outrageous Leadership: Three Exemplary Principals and the Climate They Create.” Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 2007. http://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI3255861. Roeser, Robert W., Carol Midgley, and Timothy C. Urdan. “Perceptions of the School Psychological Environment and Early Adolescents’ Psychological and Behavioral Functioning in School: The Mediating Role of Goals and Belonging.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, no. 3 (1996): 408-422. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.522.1750&r ep=rep1&type=pdf. Rooney, P., W. Hussar, M. Planty, S. Choy, G. Hampden-Thompson, and M.A. Fox. The Condition of Education. Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Education NCES 2006-071, June 2006.

248

References

Rose, Dennis M. and Jennifer M. Waterhouse. “Experiencing New Public Management: Employee Reaction to Flexible Work Practices and Performance Management.” Paper presented at the Industrial Relations European Conference, Utrecht, Netherlands, 2004. Rose_Waterhouse_IREC_2004_AV.pdf. Rose, Dennis M., M. Douglas, M. A. Griffin, and C. Linsley. “Making HR Work: Symposium–Managing the Relationship: Commitment and Work Effectiveness.” Paper presented at the Australian Human Resources Institute HR Practices Day, Brisbane, Australia, 2002. Rose, Dennis M. and M. Griffin. “High Performance Work Systems, HR Practices and High Involvement: A Group Level Analysis.” Paper presented at the Academy of Management Conference, Denver, 2002. Ross, Scott W., Natalie Romer, and Robert H. Horner. “Teacher WellBeing and the Implementation of School-wide Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports.” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14, no. 2 (2011): 118-128. doi:10.1177/1098300711413820. Ross-Porter, Meisha. “Sweating the Small Stuff Is the Key to Improving School Climate and Discipline.” Homeroom (blog), July 22, 2015. http://blog.ed.gov/2015/07/sweating-the-small-stuff-is-key-toimproving-school-climate-and-discipline/. Ruus, Viiva-Riina, Marika Veisson, Mare Leino, Loone Ots, Linda Pallas, Ene-Silvia Sarv, and Anneli Veisson. “Students’ Well-Being, Coping, Academic Success, and School Climate.” Social Behavior and Personality, 35, no. 7 (2007): 919-936. http://donnieholland.wiki.westga.edu/file/view/student+well+being,+c oping,+success+%26+climate.pdf. Sabo, Dennis J. “Organizational Climate of Middle Schools and the Quality of Student Life.” Journal of Research and Development in Education, 28, no. 3 (1995): 150-160. Sallis, James F., Terry L. Conway, Judith J. Prochaska, Thomas L. McKenzie, Simon J. Marshall, and Marianne Brown. “The Association of School Environments with Youth Physical Activity.” American Journal of Public Health, 91 (2001): 618-620. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1446652/pdf/11291375 .pdf. Samdal, Oddrun, Bente Wold, and T. Torsheim. “The Relationship between Students’ Perception of School and their Reported Health and Quality of Life.” In WHO (Ed.), Health and Health Behavior Among Young People, WHO Policies series, 1, online: www.who.dk/hbsc. doi:10.1076/sesi.10.3.296.3502.

The Psychology of School Climate

249

Samdal, Oddrun, D. Nutbeam, Bente Wold, and L. Kannas. “Achieving Health and Educational Goals through Schools: A Study of the Importance of the School Climate and the Students’ Satisfaction with School.” Health Education Research, 13, no. 3 (1998): 383-397. doi:10.1093/her/13.3.383. Sandy, S.V., Jonathan Cohen, and M.B. Fisher. “Understanding and Assessing School Climate: Development and Validation of the Comprehensive School Climate Inventory (CSCI).” Unpublished manuscript, National School Climate Center, 2007. Sawati, M.J., S. Anwar, and M. I. Majoka. “Principals’ Leadership Styles and Their Impact on Schools’ Academic Performance at Secondary Level in Kyhber Pakhtoonkhwa, Pakistan.” Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3, no. 1 (2011): 1038-1048. Scales, P.S. “Preparation of Dataset for Analysis.” Unpublished memo referenced in Safe Supportive Learning, American Institutes for Research, 2011. Schneider, Benjamin, David E. Bowen, Mark G. Ehrhart, and Karen M. Holcombe. “The Climate for Service: Evolution of a Construct,” in Handbook of Organizational Culture and Climate, eds. Neal M. Ashkanasy, Celeste P.M. Wilderom, and Mark F. Peterson. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2000. Schneider, Mark. “Do School Facilities Affect Academic Outcomes?” National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities, ED 470 979, 2002. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED470979.pdf. Schuler, Danelle Lee. “Creating a Positive Learning Climate: A Case Study of a Small Day School.” Dissertation, Emory University, 2014. http://pid.emory.edu/ark:/25593/g0knv. Schwartz, William. New Information on Youth Who Drop Out: Why They Leave and What Happens to Them. http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED396006.pdf. Scott, Terrance M. and Justin Cooper. “Teritiary-Tier PBIS in Alternative, Residential and Correctional School Settings: Considering Intensity of the Delivery of Evidence-Based Practice.” Education and Treatment of Children, 36, no. 3 (2013):101-120. doi:10.1353/etc.2013.0029. Secondary Classroom Climate Assessment Instrument. Los Angeles: Alliance for the Study of School Climate, Charter College of Education, California State University, 2004. Segredo, Mirta R. “The Relationships between Elementary School Principals’ Emotional Intelligence, Leadership Style, and School Culture.” Dissertation, Florida International University, 2014. http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd/1457.

250

References

Seil, Kacie S., Mayur M. Desai, and Megan V. Smith. “Sexual Orientation, Adult Connectedness, Substance Use, and Mental Health Outcomes Among Adolescents: Findings from the 2009 New York City Youth Risk Behavior Survey.” American Journal of Public Health, 104, no. 10, (2014): 1950-1956. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2014.302050. Sezgin, Ferudun, Serkan Kosar, Ali C. Kiline, and Zeki Ogdem. “Teacher Absenteeism in Turkish Primary Schools: A Qualitative Perspective from School Principals.” International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 6, no.3 (2014): 612-625. http://www.iojes.net/userfiles/article/iojes_1473.pdf. Shah, Nivri. “States Use School Score Cards to Target Climate Problems.” Education Week, 32, no. 26 (2013): 12. http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2013/03/27/26climate.h32.html. Shindler, John, Albert Jones, A. Dee Williams, Clint Taylor, and Hermenia Cadenas, “Exploring the School Climate–Student Achievement Connection: And Making Sense of Why the First Preceded the Second,” Alliance for the Study of School Climate (Los Angeles: California State University, 2014), http://web.calstatela.edu/centers/schoolclimate/. Shirley, Erica L.M. and Dewey G. Cornell. “The Contribution of Student Perceptions of School Climate to Understanding the Disproportionate Punishment of African-American Students in a Middle School.” School Psychology International, 33, no. 2 (2012): 115-134. doi:10.1177/0143034311406815. Shochet, Ian M., Mark R. Dadds, David Ham, and Roslyn Montague. “School Connectedness is an Underemphasized Parameter in Adolescent Mental Health.” Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 35, no. 2 (2006): 170-179. http://www.isbe.state.il.us/learningsupports/pdfs/schoolconnectedness.pdf. Shriver, Tim. Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning, 1994. www.casel.org. Simmons-Morton, Bruce G., Aria Davis Crump, Denise L. Haynie, and Keith E. Saylo. “Student-School Bonding and Adolescent Problem Behavior.” Health Education Research, 13, no. 1 (1999): 99-107. doi:10.1093/her/14.1.99. Simonsen, Brandi and George Sugai. “PBIS in Restrictive Educational Settings: Positive Support for Youth with High-Risk Behavior.” Education and Treatment of Children, Special Issue: PBIS as Prevention for High-Risk Youth in Alternative Education, Residential, and Juvenile Justice Settings, 36, no. 3(2013): 3-14. doi:10.1353/etc.2013.0030.

The Psychology of School Climate

251

Skiba, Russell and Gerald Williams. “Framing the Challenge: Research on Disciplinary Disproportionality and the Need for Equity-Explicit Intervention.” Paper at the PBIS National Leadership Forum, Rosemount, October 2013. Skiba, Russell J., Robert H. Horner, Choong-Geun Chung, M. Karega Rausch, Seth L. May, and Tary Tobin. “Race Is Not Neutral: A National Investigation of African-American and Latino Disproportionality in School Discipline.” School Psychology Review, 40, no. 1 (2011): 85107, http://www.indiana.edu/~atlantic/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/ Skiba-et-al.-Race-is-not-neutral..pdf. Skiba, Russell J. and Kimberly Knesting. “Zero Tolerance, Zero Evidence: An Analysis of School Disciplinary Practice.” New Directions for Youth Development 2001, no. 92 (2001): 17-43. doi:10.1002/yd.23320019204. Smallwood, Gina. “The Impact of School Climate on the Achievement of Elementary School Students Who Are Economically Disadvantaged: A Quantitative Study.” Dissertation, Tennessee State University, 2014. http://digitalscholarship.tnstate.edu/dissertations/AAI3623259. Somersalo, Heidi, Tytti Solantaus, and Fredrik Almqvist. “Classroom Climate and the Mental Health of Primary School Children.” Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 56, no. 4 (2002): 285-290. doi:10.1080/08039480260242787. Sommer, Barbara. “What’s Different about Truants? A Comparison Study of Eighth-Graders.” Journal of Adolescence, 14 (1985): 411-422. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02138836#page-1. Stader, David L., Thomas J. Graca, and David W. Stevens. “Teachers and the Law: Evolving Legal Issues.” The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues, and Ideas, 83, no. 3 (2010): 73-75. doi:10.1080/00098651003662148. Sternberg, Robert J. and Elena L. Grigorenko. “Are Cognitive Styles Still in Style?” American Psychologist, 52, no. 7 (1007): 700-712. http://www.beteronderwijsnederland.nl/files/sternberg%20grigrenko.p df. Stichter, Kenneth. “Student School Climate Perceptions as a Measure of School District Goal Attainment.” Journal of Educational Research, 8, no. 1 (2008): 44-65. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ809442.pdf. Sulak, Tracy N. “School Climate and Academic Achievement in Suburban Schools, Education and Urban Society.” [July 2, 2014 online publication]. doi:10.1177/0013124514541465. Suldo, Shannon M., Melanie M. McMahan, Ashley M. Chappel, and Troy Loker. “Relationships between Perceived School Climate and Adoles-

252

References

cent Mental Health across Genders.” School Mental Health, 4, Issue 2 (2012): 69-80. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12310012-9073-1#/page-1. Sum, Andrew, Paul Harrington, and Ishwar Khatiwada. “The Impact of New Immigrants on Young Native-Born Workers.” (blog) September 2006. http://cis.org/NewImmigrants-NativeBornWorkers. Swain-Bradway, Jessica, Nicole C. Swoszowski, Lauren J. Boden, and Jeffrey R. Sprague. “Voices from the Field: Stakeholders Perspective on PBIS Implementation in Alternative Educational Settings.” Education and Treatment of Children, 36, no. 3 (2013): 31-46. doi:10.1353/etc.2013.0020. Sweeney, James. “School Climate: The Key to Excellence.” National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 76, no. 547 (1992): 69-73. doi:10.1177/019263659207654708. Syversten, Amy K., Constance A. Flannagan, and Michael D. Stout. “Code of Silence: Students' Perceptions of School Climate and Willingness to Intervene in a Peer's Dangerous Plan.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, no. 1 (2009): 219-232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0013246. Tajasom, Adel and Zainal Ariffin Ahmad. “Principals’ Leadership Style and School Climate: Teachers’ Perspective.” The International Journal of Leadership in Public Services, 7, no. 4 (2011): 314–327. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17479881111194198. Tanner, C. Kenneth. “Explaining Relationships among Student Outcomes and the School’s Physical Environment.” Journal of Advanced Academics, 19, no. 3 (2008): 444-471. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ810757.pdf. Tennessee School Climate Inventory. Center for Research in Education Policy, 1991. Thapa, Amrit, Johnathon Cohen, Shawn Guffey, and Amy HigginsD’Alessandro. “A Review of School Climate Research.” Review of Educational Research, 83, no. 3 (2013): 357-385. doi:10.3102/0034654313483907. Thompson, K.R. and F. Luthans. “Organizational Culture: A Behavioral Perspective.” In B. Schneider (Ed.), Organizational Climate and Culture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990. Thoreau, Henry David. (1860). Retrieved from Henry David Thoreau Archives, http://www.digitalthoreau.org/. Tobin, Tary, Rob Horner, Claudia Vincent, and Jessica Swain-Bradway. “If Discipline Referral Rates for the School as a Whole Are Reduced, Will Rates for Students with Disabilities Also Be Reduced?” Positive

The Psychology of School Climate

253

Behavioral Interventions and Supports, OSEP Technical Assistance Center, 2014. http://www.pbis.org/common/cms/files/pbisresources/Evalu_Brief_rev ised_IEP_ODR_Nov25.pdf. Tschannen-Moran, Megan, Jennifer Parish, and Michael DiPaola. “School Climate: The Interplay Between Interpersonal Relationships and Student Achievement.” Journal of School Leadership, 16, no. 4 (2006): 386-415. Tubbs, J. Eric and Mary Garner. “The Impact of School Climate on School Outcomes.” Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 5, no. 9 (2008): 17-26. http://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1615 &context=facpubs. Turner, Isobel, Katherine J. Reynolds, Eunro Lee, Emina Subasic, and David Bromhead. “Well-Being, School Climate, and the Social Identity Process: A Latent Growth Model Study of Bullying Perpetration and Peer Victimization.” School Psychology Quarterly, 29, no. 3 (2014): 320-325. doi:10.1037/spq0000074. Twain, Mark. Following the Equator (Hartford: The American Publishing Company, 1897). Uline, Cynthia and Megan Tschannen-Moran. “The Walls Speak: The Interplay of Quality Facilities, School Climate, and Student Achievement.” Journal of Educational Administration, 46, no. 1 (2008): 55-73. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09578230810849817. Ullman, Jacqueline. “At-Risk or School-Based Risk? Testing a Model of school-Based Stressors, Coping Responses, and Academic SelfConcept for Same-Sex Attracted Youth.” Journal of Youth Studies, 18, no. 4 (2015): 417-433. doi:10.1080/13676261.2014.963539. United States Secret Service and U.S. Department of Education. “Threat Assessment in Schools: A Guide to Managing Threatening Situations and to Creating Safe School Climates.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 2004. https://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/safety/threatassessmentguide.pdf. Vieno, Alessio, Massimo Santinello, Elena Galbiati, and Massimo Mirandola. “School Climate and Well-Being in Early Adolescence: A Comprehensive Model.” European Journal of School Psychology, 2, no. 12 (2004): 204-210. https://www.education.umd.edu/HDQM/labs/Alexander/ARL/Publicati ons_files/Maggioni2004.pdf#page=219.

254

References

Villani, Christine J. “The Interaction of Leadership and Climate in Four Suburban Schools: Limits and Possibilities.” Dissertation, Fordham University, 1996). http://fordham.bepress.com/dissertations/AAI9729612. Vincent, Claudia G. and Tary J. Tobin. “An Examination of the Relationship between Implementation of Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support and Exclusion of Students from Various Ethnic Backgrounds with and without Disabilities.” Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 19, no. 4 (2011): 217-232. doi:10.1177/1063426610377329. Virtanen, Marianna, Mika Kivimaki, Pauliina Luopa, Jussi Vahtera, Marko Elovainio, Jukka Jokela, and Minna Pietikainen. “Staff Reports of Psychosocial Climate at School and Adolescents’ Health, Truancy and Health Education in Finland.” The European Journal of Public Health, 19, no. 5 (2014): 554-560. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckp032. Visser, Susanna N., Dennis Kramer, Angela B. Snyder, Joyce Sebian, Garry McGiboney, and Arden Handler. “Student-Perceived School Climate is Associated with ADHD Medication Treatment among Adolescents in Medicaid.” Journal of Attention Disorders, online February 20, 2015. doi:10.1177/ 1087054715569601. Wang, Ming-Te. “School Climate Support for Behavioral and Psychological Adjustment: Testing the Mediating Effect of Social Competence.” School Psychology Quarterly, 24, No. 4 (2009): 240-251. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0017999. Wang, Ming-Te, Robert L. Selman, Thomas J. Dishion, and Elizabeth A. Stormshak. “A Tobit Regression Analysis of the Covariation between Middle School Students' Perceived School Climate and Behavioral Problems.” Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20, no. 2: (2010): 274-286. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00648.x. Wang, Ming-Te, and Thomas J. Dishion. “The Trajectories of Adolescents’ Perceptions of School Climate, Deviant Peer Affiliation, and Behavioral Problems during the Middle School Years.” Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22, no. 1 (2012): 40-53. doi:10.1111/j.15327795.2011.00763.x. Wang, Wiejun, Tracy Vaillancourt, Heather L. Brittain, Patricia McDougall, Amanda Krygsman, David Smith, Charles E. Cunningham, J. D. Haltigan, and Shelley Hymel. “School Climate, Peer Victimization, and Academic Achievement: Results from a Multi-Informant Study.” School Psychology Quarterly, 29, no. 3 (2014): 360-377. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/spq0000084.

The Psychology of School Climate

255

Wasley, Patricia, Michelle Fine, Matt Gladden, Nicole E. Holland, Sherry P. King, Esther Mosak, and Linda C. Powell. Small Schools: Great Strides. A Study of New Small Schools in Chicago. New York: The Bank Street College of Education, 2000. https://s3.amazonaws.com/bankstreet_web/media/filer_public/filer_pu blic/2014/10/29/small-schools-study.pdf. Waters, Tim, Robert J. Marzano, and Brian McNulty. Balanced Leadership: What 30 Years of Research Tells Us about the Effect of Leadership on Student Achievement. Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning, 2003. http://www.ctc.ca.gov/educator-prep/ASC/5031 RR_BalancedLeadership.pdf. Way, Niobe, Ranjini Reddy, and Jean Rhodes. “Students’ Perceptions of School Climate During the Middle School Years: Associations with Trajectories of Psychological and Behavioral Adjustment.” American Journal of Community Psychology, 40 (2007): 194-213. doi:10.1007/s10464-007-9143-y. Weinstein, Carol S. “The Physical Environment of the School: A Review of the Research.” Review of Educational Research, 49, no. 4 (1979): 577-610. doi:10.3102/00346543049004577. Weisel, Amatzia and Orit Dror. “Climate, Sense of Efficacy, and Israeli Teachers’ Attitudes toward Inclusion of Students with Special Needs.” Education, Citizenship, and Social Justice, 1, no. 2 (2006): 157-174. doi:10.1177/1746197906064677. Welsh, Wayne N. “The Effects of School Climate on School Disorder.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 567, no. 1 (2000): 88-107. doi:10.1177/000271620056700107. Welsh, Wayne N., Jack R. Greene, and Patricia H. Jenkins. “School Disorder: The Influence of Individual, Institutional, and Community Factors.” Criminology, 37, no. 1 (1999): 73-116. doi:10.1111/j.17459125.1999.tb00480.x. Welsh, Wayne N., Patricia H. Jenkins, Jack R. Greene, Dawn Caron, Eric Hoffman, Ellen Kurtz, Donna Perone, and Robert Stokes. Building a Culture and Climate of Safety in Public Schools in Philadelphia: School-based Management and Violence Reduction, Paper for the National Institute of Justice. Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, 1996. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Photocopy/171631NCJRS.pdf. Wernick, Laura J., Alex Kulick, and M. H. Inglehart. “Influence of Peers, Teachers, and Climate on Students’ Willingness to Intervene When Witnessing Anti-Transgender Harassment.” Journal of Adolescence, 37, no. 6 (2014): 927-935. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.06.008.

256

References

White, Nick, Tamika LaSalle, Jeffrey S. Ashby, and Joel Meyers. “A Brief Measure of Adolescent Perceptions of School Climate.” School Psychology Quarterly, 29, no. 3 (2014): 349-359. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/spq0000075. Williams, J. and M. Batten. The Quality of School Life. Hawthorn, Victoria: The Australian Council for Educational Research, 1981. Williams, J.H., C.D. Ayers, and M.W. Arthur. “Risk and Protective Factors in the Development of Delinquency and Conduct Disorder.” In M. W. Fraser (Ed.), Risk and Resilience in Childhood: an Ecological Perspective, 1997, 140-170. Wolfe, Bryan R. “A Correlational Analysis of Servant Leadership and Secondary School Climate.” Dissertation, Grand Canyon University, 2013. Woolner, Pamela, Sheila McCarter, Kate Wall, and Steve Higgins. “Changed Learning through Changed Space: When Can a Participatory Approach to the Learning Environment Challenge Preconceptions and Alter Practice?” Improving Schools, 15, no. 1 (2012): 45-60. doi:10.1177/1365480211434796. Wormington, Stephanie V., Kristen G. Anderson, Ashley Schneider, Kristin L. Tomlinson, and Sandra A. Brown. “Peer Victimization and Adolescent Adjustment: Does School Belonging Matter?” Journal of School Violence, tandfonline.com, September 26, 2014. doi:10.1080/15388220.2104.992472. Youth Risk Behavior Survey. Atlanta, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1990. http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/index.htm. Zaykowski, Heather and Whitney Gunter. “Youth Victimization: School Climate or Deviant Lifestyles?” Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27, no. 3 (2012): 431-452. doi:10.1177/0886260511421678. Zullig, Keith J., E. Scott Huebner, and Jon M. Patton. “Relationships Among School Climate Domains and School Satisfaction.” Psychology in the Schools, 48, no. 2 (2011): 133-145. doi:10.1002/pits.20532.

INDEX

Abbreviated School Climate Survey - Student Version, 177, 226 Adverse Childhood Experiences, 38, 228 Alaska School Climate and Connectedness Survey, 171, 182 Attribution Theory, 206, 207 Fundamental Attribution Error, 206 Body Mass Index, 149, 152, 229 Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Theory, 3 California School Climate, Health, and Learning Survey, 170, 182 Center for Humanitarian Logistics, 215 Child and Adolescent Trial for Cardiovascular Health, 147 Comer School Development Program, 99 Communities That Care Youth Survey, 174, 182 Comprehensive School Climate Inventory, 172, 182 Conditions for Learning Survey, 171, 182 Consortium on Chicago School Research Survey, 174, 182 Contact Hypothesis, 189 Cultural-Ecological Model, 3 Culture of Excellence and Ethics Assessment, 175, 183 Cyberbullying, 117 Delaware School Climate Survey, 171, 182 Delaware School Climate Survey – Home Edition, 171 Early Learning Climate, 211

Educational Policy School Climate Inventory, 182 Epidemiology, 232 Finlayson School Climate Questionnaires, 165, 182 Flourishing Children Survey of Social Competence, 176, 183 Fundamental Attribution Error (see Attribution Theory) Georgia Appleseed, 216 Georgia Brief School Climate Inventory, 168, 182 Georgia Student Health Survey 2.0, 168, 182 Gestalt, 1 Get Georgia Reading Campaign, 216 Herman Hesse, 95 John Dewey, 5, 8, 208 Juvenile Justice, 141 transition, 142 education, 142 PBIS, 142 Military Students, 201 Moos Work Environment Scale, 170, 183 National School Climate Center, 4, 21, 172, 232 Office Discipline Referrals, 135, 137, 138 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 48 Organizational Climate Descriptive Questionnaire, 64, 178, 183 Organizational Climate Questionnaire, 91 Organizational Health Inventory, 17, 191

258 Perceived School Experience Scale, 174, 183 Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS), 13 improving school climate, 30, 31 treatment, 21 implementation, 131 frameworks, 191 preschool, 212 Racial Climate Survey, 23, 178, 183, 186 Reciprocal Determinism, 12, 16 Robert Greenleaf, 95 Rutter Teacher Questionnaire, 43 School Quality Management Culture Survey, 255 Search Institute Creating a Great Place to Learn Survey, 175, 183 Secondary Classroom Climate Assessment Instrument, 183, 246 Secondary School Climate Assessment Instrument, 176, 183 Self-efficacy, 26, 39, 80, 81, 84, 90, 170, 178 Self-esteem, 39, 53, 64, 89, 91, 103, 109, 127, 177, 210

Index Servant Leadership, 95, 96, 103, 105 Sexual Orientation emotional development, 13 school climate, 197, 203 Social Emotional Learning, 9, 38 prevention, 10 environment, 10 achievement, 34 South Carolina Safe School Climate Act, 112 System of Care, 191, 202 Teacher Efficacy school climate, 77, 91, 92 new teacher, 80 leadership, 92 confidence, 92 Transactional Leadership, 103 Transformational Leadership measuring, 94 climate, 94, 103, 104 research, 102 Tripod Surveys, 177, 183 Youth Risk Behavior Survey, 178, 182, 198