A Cross-National Analysis of Principals’ Reports of School Violence

AuthorYasuo Miyazaki,Laura E. Agnich
DOI10.1177/1057567713515273
Published date01 December 2013
Date01 December 2013
Subject MatterArticles
ICJ515273 378..400 Article
International Criminal Justice Review
2013, Vol. 23(4) 378-400
A Cross-National Analysis
ª 2013 Georgia State University
Reprints and permission:
of Principals’ Reports
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1057567713515273
icj.sagepub.com
of School Violence
Laura E. Agnich1 and Yasuo Miyazaki2
Abstract
School violence is a growing problem throughout the world, although some nations exhibit higher
rates of violence than others. This research examines the relationships between measures of strain
and principals’ reports of school violence in schools across 39 nation-units derived from the 2007
Trends in International Mathematics and Science Studies survey. Using multilevel linear analysis, find-
ings indicate that schools with larger eighth-grade sizes, fewer females, and greater resource shortages
exhibit higher levels of violence across nations, in addition to higher national average school sizes and
lower national levels of math achievement, lending support to strain theory. Interestingly, nations with
higher gross domestic products (GDPs) and those that spend higher percentages of their GDP on edu-
cation also exhibit higher levels of reported school violence, suggesting that potentially, the construct
of school violence may be more socially acceptable to report and address in wealthier nations.
Keywords
school violence, strain, SES, math achievement, GDP
Introduction
School violence has been a growing concern for students and school staff in the United States
(Olweus, 1993) and across the world (Jensen & Howard, 1999) for decades, although recent highly
publicized incidents of violence have raised the concerns to unprecedented levels. In March 2009,
17-year-old Tim Kretschmer opened fire on two classrooms in his high school in Winnenden,
Germany, killing 12 inside the school. He then shot a bystander, fled to a neighboring town where
he killed two more bystanders, and engaged in a gun battle with police before committing suicide
(Rayner, Hall, & Bingham, 2009). These crimes and several others brought the global nature of
the problem of school violence to public attention, but the problems of everyday violence, aggres-
sion, teasing, and intimidation are also global and warrant empirical analysis particularly because
these types of violence are much more common (Baker, LeTendre, & Akiba, 2005).
1 Department of Criminal Justice and Criminology, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA, USA
2 School of Education, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA
Corresponding Author:
Laura E. Agnich, Department of Criminal Justice and Criminology, Georgia Southern University, P.O. Box 8105, Statesboro,
GA 30460, USA.
Email: lagnich@georgiasouthern.edu

Agnich and Miyazaki
379
The global nature of school violence has been well established as a serious problem for school
administrators, students, and teachers (Akiba, LeTendre, & Baker, 2002; Baker et al., 2005; Den-
mark, Krauss, Wesner, Midlarsky, & Gielen, 2005; Stassen Berger, 2005), as have the deleterious
effects of this violence on individual students (Boxer, Edwards-Leeper, Goldstein, Musher-
Eizenman, & Dubow, 2003; Buhs, Ladd, & Herald, 2006; Hazler, 1994; Hazler, Hoover, & Oliver,
1991; Olweus, 1993, 1994; Ladd, 2003) and teachers (e.g., Anderson, 1998). For example, stu-
dents who are victimized may develop suicidal thoughts and actions, low self-esteem, anxiety,
depression, and school avoidance (Boulton & Smith, 1994; Hutzell & Payne, 2012; Kim, Koh,
& Leventhal, 2005a; Kim & Leventhal, 2008; Seals & Young, 2003) in addition to revenge fan-
tasies (Hazler, 1996) and aggressive behavior (Anderson et al., 2001) potentially including school
shootings (Hazler & Carney, 2000; Leary, Kowalski, Smith, & Phillips, 2003). Students who per-
petrate acts of violence at school also experience negative consequences including poor psycho-
logical adjustment, substance use, and social isolation (see Nansel et al., 2001). Given the global
nature of the incidence of school violence, examining factors associated with its prevalence across
nations is therefore imperative. Prior research has examined individual risk factors (Warner,
Weist, & Krulak, 1999), organizational factors such as the effects of schools’ and communities’
contexts (e.g., Astor, Benbenishty, & Estrada, 2009; Benbenishty & Astor, 2005), but very few
studies (e.g., Akiba et al., 2002) have examined the role of national contexts’ effects on levels
of school violence.
In the present study, we examine the context of schools and the characteristics of nation-states
that affect the level of school violence reported by school principals in the 2007 Trends in Interna-
tional Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). We use hierarchical linear modeling to take into
account the nested structure of cross-national data, because schools in the same nation may share
characteristics and differ from schools in other nations. We define school violence operationally
as a continuum of aggression ranging from nonphysical classroom disturbances and intimidation
to instances of physical, interpersonal violence (see Yu, 2003). Building on prior research, we exam-
ine whether variables associated with strain theory—namely economic disadvantage, the level of
educational achievement, and inequalities at both the school and national levels—influence higher
levels of violence within schools across nations.
Literature Review
Cross-National Research on School Violence
Throughout the European Union, concerns over school violence have led to changes in national
policies to address the growing problem (Ananiadou & Smith, 2002). In the United Kingdom, vio-
lence is a daily reality in schools, and there is widespread public belief that school safety has been
declining (Gill & Hearnshaw, 1997); therefore, school violence is a top political concern among
U.K. legislators (Cowie, Hutson, Jennifer, & Myers, 2008; Cowie, Jennifer, & Sharp, 2003; Cowie,
Naylor, Talamelli, Chauhan, & Smith, 2002; Smith, 2003). Additionally, a recent study of Turkish
school children’s drawings revealed the students, age 12–13, were deeply affected by violence in
their schools, as they depicted scenes of student-on-student and teacher-on-student violence occur-
ring at various places on school grounds (Yurtal & Artut, 2009). And in Israel, almost one third of
students reported perpetrating violence toward their peers, and one in five reported perpetrating vio-
lence against their teachers (Khoury-Kassabri, Astor, & Benbenishty, 2009). School violence is also
a growing problem for students in developing nations such as Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Ethiopia
(Terefe & Mengistu, 1997) and is problematic for students in East Asian countries as well (Ando,
Asakura, & Simons-Morton, 2005; Chen & Astor, 2009; Kim, Koh, & Leventhal, 2005b; Moon,
Hwang, & McCluskey, 2008; Wei & Chen, 2009; Yang, Kim, Kim, Shin, & Yoon, 2006).

380
International Criminal Justice Review 23(4)
Teachers worldwide have reported high levels of classroom disruptions due to relatively ‘‘minor’’
forms of violence and misbehavior in their classrooms (Anderson, 1998), and teachers are them-
selves victimized in schools (see Steffgen & Ewen, 2007). In Israel, teachers reported being exposed
to a great deal of verbal and physical violence, but most reported feeling safe and did not view vio-
lence as a serious problem at their school (Zeira, Astor, & Benbenishty, 2004). However, according
to 1995 data from the Trends in Mathematics and Science Studies, in many nations, up to 40% of
teachers reported that their teaching is limited by student disruptions in their classrooms. So while
teachers worldwide generally do not perceive a threat to their own or students’ safety as limiting
their teaching, low-level forms of violence such as classroom disturbances do disrupt the teach-
ing–learning process (Baker et al., 2005) and can therefore be considered a form of violence.
International studies of school violence have revealed numerous social patterns. First, males are
more often victims and perpetrators of school violence (e.g., Akiba et al., 2002). In Taiwan, for
example, male students are more likely to be involved in incidents of school violence (Chen & Astor,
2009; Hu & Lin, 2001), as are students in junior high (Chen & Astor, 2009; Wei, Chang, & Chen,
2007). Males and younger students are also more likely to self-report perpetrating acts of school vio-
lence in Israel (Khoury-Kassabri et al., 2009). However, a study of teachers’ perceptions of school
violence in Israel revealed that teachers were victimized more in high school, and by more serious
violence, than junior high and elementary school teachers (Zeira et al., 2004).
It is important to note that teachers, students, and school principals may tend to underreport or
overreport the levels of violence in their schools, depending on their specific cultural context. For
example, a study of sexual harassment victimization among female students in a Nigerian university
found that the majority of respondents did not consider unwanted touching by their peers to be a
form of harassment (Popoola, 2008). By contrast, definitions of sexual harassment in American uni-
versities typically include unwanted physical touching (e.g., Fisher, Cullen, & Turner, 2000). In
addition, students’, teachers’, and principals’ reports of violence within schools may not correlate.
For example, Baker, LeTendre, and Akiba (2005) note that students’ reports of victimization may
provide a conservative estimate of the amount of violence in schools, as these reports...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT