Many factors enter into an assessment of school safety. Professionals in diverse disciplines have made considerable progress in sharing knowledge and resources to prevent school violence. As researchers and practitioners refine violence prevention efforts so that the resultant strategies become more effective and widely implemented, the confusion surrounding school violence must also be addressed.

The terms "school violence" and "school safety," while frequently used within justice, education, and public health arenas, have yet to be commonly defined. Researchers and practitioners use these terms to describe a range of practices, events, and behaviors; however, they have not attained consensus on the nature and scope of the school violence problem. Multiple approaches can prove beneficial as each discipline brings to bear the full force of its knowledge and experience, but they complicate the task of summarizing the state of school violence. For instance, should school violence be considered a subset of youth violence? Should measures of school violence and school safety include all aggressive behavior or only behaviors that result in arrest or injury? What are the best indicators of school violence and school safety? Who should be responsible for measuring those indicators?

While researchers and practitioners can disagree on terms and approaches, the potential for eliminating school violence lies in using their collective wisdom and energy.

National Data on School Safety

Although progress has been made in monitoring issues related to school violence, providing a comprehensive overview of the state of school violence is difficult. First, no standard set of indicators exists to describe school violence, and the indicators that are available have limitations. For example, data from the National Crime Victimization Survey, which is conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, describe the extent to which students have been victims of crime at school. These data, however, do not yield school-level information that would provide a better understanding of which types of schools are experiencing the highest levels of crime. Second, several self-report student surveys provide information only about high school students. Third, schools do not use the same definitions for incidents; consequently, aggregating data across schools is difficult.

Government agencies, research organizations, universities, and schools are working diligently to address these limitations and have identified data that provide a more comprehensive picture of school violence. Some of the studies from which these data are derived have been conducted for several years. Such long-term data are helpful in determining trends for specific indicators of school violence. The indicators presented in this article are not the only indicators available related to school violence. They were selected to represent the breadth of events and behaviors that contribute to school violence. Other publications, such as the 2000 Annual Report on School Safety (U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Justice, 2000) and Indicators of School Crime and Safety, 2000 (Kaufman et al., 2000) contain additional indicators and State and local data.¹

School-Associated Violent Deaths

School-associated violent deaths are rare. Preliminary data from the School-Associated Violent Deaths Study, funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Departments of Justice and Education, indicate that less than 1 percent of the more than 1,350 children who were murdered in the first half of the 1998-99 school year (July 1, 1998, through December 31, 1998) were killed at school (i.e., killed on school property, at a school-sponsored event, or on the way to or from school).

In the entire school year (July 1, 1998, through June 30, 1999), 34 incidents occurred in which a child or adult was murdered or committed suicide while at school, resulting in the deaths of 50 individuals. Homicide accounted for 38 of these deaths (including 34 students), suicide accounted for 9, and an unintentional shooting accounted for 1. A law enforcement officer in the course of duty killed two adults. Only two of these incidents involved multiple victims.

The total number of incidents in which a child or adult was murdered or committed suicide at school declined from 49 during the 1995-96 school year to 34 during the 1998-99 school year (see figure 1). The number of students murdered at school has fluctuated between 30 and 35 during the 1994-95 and 1997-98 school years (see figure 2).

It is also important to note that the number of multiple-victim homicides at school has declined from six incidents in the 1997-98 school year to two in the 1998-99 school year (see figure 3). Since the 1992-93 school year, at least one multiple-victim homicide has been committed each year (except for the 1993-94 school year).

Nonfatal Crimes Against Students

Nonfatal crimes (e.g., theft, rape, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault) against students at school declined from 144 per 1,000 students in 1992 to 101 per 1,000 students in 1998 (see figure 4). This reflects a decline in the number of nonfatal crimes from 3.4 million in 1992 to 2.7 million in 1998.

Students are less likely to be victims of serious violent crimes (e.g., rape, sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault) and nonfatal violent crimes (serious violent crime plus simple assault) at school than away from school. In 1998, 12- through 18-year-old students were victims of 1.2 million nonfatal violent crimes at school. This represents a decline from 48 per 1,000 students in 1992 to 43 per 1,000 students in 1998 (see figure 5).

However, the rate of serious violent crimes against students at school stayed fairly consistent from 1992 to 1998 (see figure 6). In 1998, 9 out of every 1,000 students were victims of serious violent crimes while at school or going to and from school, whereas 21 out of every 1,000 students were victims of serious violent crimes while away from school.

Although more students have been victims of theft at school than away from school, thefts committed at school against 12- to 18-year-old students have declined dramatically since 1992. In 1992, 95 thefts per 1,000 students occurred; in 1998, this number declined to 58 per 1,000 students (see figure 7). In 1998, 58 percent of all crime at school was theft.

Nonfatal Crimes Against Teachers

Teachers are also victims of crime at school. As with crimes against students, most crimes against teachers involve theft. Teachers in urban schools are more vulnerable to crime at school than are those in suburban schools.

Each year from 1994 through 1998, an average of 133,700 violent crimes and 217,400 thefts were committed against teachers at school, as reported by teachers from public and private schools. This translates into an annual rate of 31 violent crimes and 51 thefts for every 1,000 teachers.

Teachers in urban schools were more likely to be the victims of violent crimes (40 out of every 1,000) than were teachers in suburban or rural schools (24 out of every 1,000).

Carrying a Weapon and Fighting

Physical fighting and carrying weapons at school are dangerous and disruptive to the learning environment. Contrary to public perception, however, fighting and carrying weapons at school have declined steadily in recent years. Between 1993 and 1999, the percentage of students in grades 9 through 12 who reported carrying a weapon to school on one or more days during the previous month declined from 12 to 7 percent. During this same time period, the percentage of students who reported being involved in a fight on school property during the previous year also declined, from 16 to 14 percent (see figure 8).

Students' Perception of School Safety

No matter how infrequently they occur, crimes involving students and teachers contribute to a climate of fear that undermines the learning environment. Since 1995, there has been a welcome decline in students' fears of attack and harm at school and in their reports of gang presence at school.

Students from all ethnic groups reported fearing attack or harm at school less often in 1999 than they did in 1995; however, racial and ethnic groups differ in their perceptions of how safe they are at school. In both 1995 and 1999, larger percentages of African American and Hispanic students feared attacks than did white students (see figure 9).

Similar trends can be seen in students' reports of avoiding certain areas in school—presumably for safety reasons. Between 1995 and 1999, the percentage of students who reported avoiding such places decreased. In 1995 and 1999, African American and Hispanic students were more likely to avoid certain areas in schools than were white students (see figure 10).

Classroom Disruption

Schools continue to experience minor crimes and disorder. Student disruption that interferes with teaching remains a significant problem in many classrooms. As other situations improve (e.g., carrying weapons and physical fighting), student behavior that leads to classroom disruption remains at unacceptably high levels. Student misbehavior has, at one point or another, interrupted teaching in most 8th grade classrooms and in more than half of all 12th grade classrooms (see figure 11).

State and Local Data

Although national data contribute to an understanding of school safety, they may not be the most useful source of information for States, districts, or schools in assessing the frequency and scope of school-related crime, identifying their school safety needs, and developing strategies that address those needs. Data collected at the State and local levels are more useful in identifying problems and monitoring the progress of interventions. Most State and local data related to school safety rely on student risk behavior data (such as self-reported weapons carrying).

Many children and adolescents behave in ways that put them at risk for injury. Reducing these risk behaviors is a critical step in preventing injury and promoting school safety. To monitor student risk behaviors, many States, territories, and cities conduct the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS),² developed by CDC. YRBS, which includes questions about carrying weapons, physical fighting, and victimization on school property, is administered to students in grades 9-12. States that conduct YRBS benefit from having information about their students' health risk behaviors to use in planning and monitoring programs.

YRBS data are collected every 2 years. Ten States and six cities have data that can be used to compare 1993 and 1999 results to determine whether student behaviors have changed. Between 1993 and 1999, several States and cities experienced significant decreases in some student risk behaviors. For example, in 7 of the 10 States and 4 of the 6 cities, the percentage of students who carried a weapon on school property was significantly lower in 1999 than in 1993. These changes are similar to the national trends described above.³ CDC provides technical assistance to States interested in conducting YRBS.⁴

Conclusion

This article has attempted to address those questions at the heart of the school safety issue: How much crime is occurring in the Nation's schools? Are schools more safe or less safe than in the past? Do all students feel safe at school? What kinds of crimes are occurring?

Most of the indicators (except for serious violent crimes and classroom disruption) suggest that progress is being made in reducing crime and violence in schools. However, these indicators represent a wide range of events and behaviors that are not always easily interpreted. For example, although school-associated violent deaths are extremely tragic, they are also rare. Classroom disruption on the other hand, although significantly less serious, is prevalent and erodes the educational opportunities of many students. As more is learned about the antecedents of violence and effective prevention strategies, additional indicators will play significant roles in enhancing our understanding of school violence.

Gaps exist in data about school violence, and schools and communities should address those gaps. Monitoring the full range of violent, criminal, and delinquent incidents can help schools and communities better understand their school safety needs. Uniform data collection is critical for monitoring problems across locations and determining where the greatest need for resources exists. In addition, monitoring incidents can help schools identify troubled youth and provide them with services before their problems overwhelm them and, perhaps, erupt in violence.

References

Kaufman, P., Chen, X., Choy, S.P., Ruddy, S.A., Miller, A.K., Fleury, J.K., Chandler, K.A., Rand, M.R., Klaus, P., and Planty, M.G. 2000. Indicators of School Crime and Safety, 2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics, and U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Justice. 2000. 2000 Annual Report on School Safety. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Justice.

Notes

¹ The data presented in this article are drawn from the 2000 Annual Report on School Safety, published by the U.S. Departments of Justice and Education. The 2000 Annual Report on School Safety relies on data from several different studies conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Center for Education Statistics, and the Survey Research Center of the University of Michigan.

² In 1999, 42 States conducted the survey.

³ The national data are collected independently and are not a compilation of State and city data.

⁴ For more information about YRBS, contact CDC's Division of Adolescent and School Health at 770-488-3257 or visit the Division's Web site at www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dash.