THE ROLE OF SCHOOL CLIMATE IN THE MENTAL HEALTH AND VICTIMIZATION

OF STUDENTS IN MILITARY-CONNECTED SCHOOLS

by

Kris Matthew Tunac De Pedro        

A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE USC GRADUATE SCHOOL

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy

(EDUCATION)

December 2012

Copyright 2012 Kris Matthew Tunac De Pedro

 

ii

Dedication

First, I dedicate this dissertation to my parents, Maximino and Mayda De Pedro. They

gave me life, love, and support. Throughout my academic and professional career, they provided

me with the encouragement to persist even though the most difficult challenges. Without them, I

would never be where I am today. I pursue great things in my career and life because they inspire

me to dream big.

I dedicate this dissertation to my family—cousins Camille and Melissa, Auntie Erna, and

Auntie Nelia—for giving me the emotional support and courage to move forward in graduate

school. I am so fortunate to have the support of a close-knit family who love and care about me

so much! I also dedicate this dissertation to my four best friends in the world, April, Grace,

Karolina, and Joel. Few people in the world have lifelong friends, who are incredibly loyal and

dedicated. I thank them for their emotional support and life lessons.

This dissertation is also dedicated to Aaron, the love of my life. I am grateful for his love

and support in the final stages of my dissertation. Everyday, he teaches me about what it means

to have strong character—integrity, trust, honesty, passion, and love. It is these qualities that will

help me fulfill my truest potential. I am excited for our life journey together.

I would also like to dedicate this dissertation to my Ph.D. colleagues past and present—

Misty, Monica, Icela, Jonathan, Connie, Joey, Anthony, Robin, Katie, Tiffany, Cait, Dara, and

Megan. It was so wonderful to be around such intelligent, inspiring, and enthusiastic educators. I

am so grateful for all the opportunities you gave me to talk about the challenges of this PhD

program, for your patience and understanding, and for the all the emotional support, love. Most

importantly, I am grateful for the endless laughter, which was really good for my soul and spirit.

 

iii

I would like to dedicate this dissertation to all my mentors, Dr. Tamika Gilreath, Dr.

Shafiqa Ahmadi, Dr. Hazel Atuel, Dr. Darnell Cole, and Dr. Julie Cederbaum. I am grateful for

their emotional support throughout my academic journey at USC. They gave me the

encouragement and support throughout my dissertation. They are true examples of what it means

to be a passionate academic truly dedicated to knowing more about the world around us.

Last but not least, this dissertation is dedicated to Dr. Ron Avi Astor. I am forever

indebted to his personal and professional guidance at USC. He gave me amazing opportunities

and the love and emotional support that I needed throughout this process. I am so fortunate to

have had his mentorship and friendship. Every day, he inspires me to change the world.

 

iv

Table of Contents Dedication ii List of Tables v Abstract vi Chapter One: Introduction, Rationale, and Overview of the Three Studies 1

Introduction 1 Theoretical Framework 4 Structure of Dissertation 14

Chapter Two: School Climate Perceptions among Students in Military-Connected Schools:

A Comparison of Military and Non-Military Students from the Same Schools 18 Introduction 18 Methods 23 Results 30 Discussion 39 Limitations 42 Implications 43

Chapter Three: The Role of School Climate in the Mental Health of Secondary Students: A

Study of Students in Military-Connected Schools 45 Introduction 45 Methods 52 Results 66 Discussion 90 Implications 96

Chapter Four: Victimization Rates of Secondary Students: The Role of School Climate in

Military-Connected Schools 99 Introduction 99 Methods 108 Results 122 Discussion 134 Implications 140

Chapter Five: Integration and Implementation of Findings from Three Studies

Purpose of the Studies 143 Overall Findings and Links to Research 147

Bibliography 160

 

v

List  of  Tables  

Table 1. Domains, Scales and Items for the Demographic Variables 26

Table 2. Domains, Scales and Items for the School Climate Variables 29 Table 3. Sample Characteristics for Study #1 31

Table 4. Perceptions of Belonging by Military Connection Status 33

Table 5. Perceptions of School Safety by Military Connection Status 34

Table 6. Perceptions of Relationships by Military Connection Status 35

Table 7. Perceptions of Meaningful Participation by Military Connection Status 36

Table 8. Perceptions of Risky Behavior Approval by Military Connection Status 37

Table 9. Perceptions of Respect for Family by Military Connection Status 38

Table 10. Domains, Scales and Items for the Mental Health 56

Table 11. Domains, Scales and Items for the School Climate Variables 59

Table 12. Deployment Item 60

Table 13. Domains, Scales and Items for the Demographic Variables 62

Table 14. Sample Characteristics for Study #2 67

Table 15. Means and Standard Deviations of Mental Health Scales 69

Table 16. Depression, Well-Being, and Suicidal Ideation by Military Connection 69

Table 17. Well-Being by Military Connection Status 71

Table 18. Depression by Military Connection Status 73

Table 19. Correlational Analyses for Study #2 76

Table 20. Logistic Regressions of Mental Health by Demographic and School Climate Variables among All Students 79

Table 21. Logistic Regressions of Mental Health by Demographics, School Climate and

Deployment 82

 

vi

Table 22. Logistic Regressions of Well-Being by Demographics and School Climate among Non-Military Students and Military Students 84

Table 23. Logistic Regressions of Depression by Demographics and School Climate among Non-

Military Students and Military Students 86 Table 24. Logistic Regressions of Suicidal Ideation by Demographics and School Climate among

Non-Military Students and Military Students 88 Table 25. Domains, Scales and Items for the Victimization 112 Table 26. Domains, Scales and Items for the School Climate Variables 115 Table 27. Deployment Item 116 Table 28. Domains, Scales and Items for the Demographic Variables 118

Table 29. Sample Characteristics for Study #3 123

Table 30. Victimization Rates by Military Connection Status 125

Table 31. Correlational Analyses of School Climate, Deployment and Victimization 126

Table 32. Logistic Regressions of Victimization by Demographics and School Climate 128 Table 33. Logistic Regressions of Victimization by Demographics, Deployment, and School Climate 130 Table 34. Logistic Regressions of Victimization by School Climate 133

 

vii

Abstract

Research on school climate has found that a supportive school climate promotes positive

social, emotional, psychological and academic outcomes among students, even student

populations experiencing stressors in the family and community context. Studies have shed light

on the stressors (i.e. deployment) and the negative mental health outcomes of children in military

families. Given the significant presence of military students in over 200 civilian public school

districts in the United States, it is surprising that school climate researchers have largely ignored

the role that a supportive school climate plays in the social and emotional outcomes of military

students. This multiple manuscript dissertation utilizes a population sample of secondary

students in eight military-connected school districts to examine the role that a supportive school

climate plays in two key social and emotional outcomes known to impact academic

achievement—mental health and victimization. The first study provides detailed descriptive

analyses of school climate perceptions (belonging, caring relationships, safety, meaningful

participation, respect for student’s family, and risky behavior disapproval) among military and

non-military students. The second study examines associations between multiple components of

school climate and three mental health indicators—well-being, depression, and suicidal

ideation—among all students as well as within military and non-military students. The third

study assesses associations between school climate and victimization among all students as well

as within military and non-military students. Findings from the descriptive analyses indicate that

military students—those with a parent or those with a sibling in the military—consistently have

more negative school climate perceptions than non-military students. In addition, findings from

multivariate analyses reveal that school climate promotes well-being and curbs rates of

depression, suicidal ideation and victimization among all students and within military and non-

 

viii

military student populations. This was true even accounting for deployment. This means that a

positive school climate can have healing effects that improve mental health and reduce violence

and suicide for both military and nonmilitary students. This dissertation concludes with

implications for future educational reform, practice and policy.

                                                             

 

1

Chapter One:

Introduction, Rationale, and Overview of the Three Studies

Introduction

A positive school climate is one where students have caring relationships with peers and

adults, a sense of belonging, feel a high degree of personal safety, participate meaningfully in

school policies and activities, disapprove of risky behaviors among peers, and feel that peers and

school staff are aware of their family issues (Brand, Feldner, Shim, Seitsinger, & Dumas, 2003;

Cohen, McCabe, Michelli, & Pickeral, 2009; Zullig, Koopman, Patton, & Ubbes, 2010). A large

body of literature has found that a positive school climate can promote a wide range of positive

academic, social and emotional, and psychological student outcomes (Comer, 1984; Hoy &

Hunnum, 1997; Jia, Way, Ling, Yoshikawa, Chen, Hughes, Ke & Lu, 2009; Modin & Ostberg,

2009). Several of these studies have found that a nurturing and caring school climate affects two

key outcomes known to impact academic functioning and achievement: mental health and

victimization (Cohen et al., 2009; Zullig et al., 2010). Research suggests that the role that school

climate plays in reducing mental health problems and victimization rates can be generalized to

different student populations in different geographic contexts, even among student populations

experiencing significant psychological strain (i.e. students with war trauma, students in highly

violent neighborhoods) (Comer, 1984; Elliot, Cornell, Gregory, & Fan, 2010; Hanish & Guerra,

2000; Khoury-Kassabri, Benbenishty, Astor, & Zeira, 2004).

Given the long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2002, it is surprising that one

population of students has been largely ignored by school climate researchers: the children of

military service personnel. Military children in the current war context experience significant

psychological strain as a result of the deployment cycle (De Pedro et al., 2011). When parents

 

2

and/or other family members are deployed to war, military children experience multiple stressors

including parental separation, geographic relocation and school transitions, shifting household

roles and responsibilities, and exposure to the stress of a left-behind parent (Chandra, Martin,

Hawkins, & Richardson, 2010; De Pedro et al., 2011; Flake, Davis, Johnson, & Middleton,

2009). In addition, even when parents or family members return from war and reintegrate into

civilian society, military children continue to encounter stressful experiences related to veteran

war trauma, re-adjusting family dynamics, and repeated, multiple deployments. A large body of

research has found that military-specific stressors adversely impact the psychological and

emotional well-being of military children. For instance, studies have found that when compared

to children in civilian families, military children have more negative mental health outcomes and

experience higher rates of physical and emotional maltreatment and abuse during the current war

context (Chandra, Martin, Hawkins, & Richardson, 2010; Flake et al., 2009; Gorman, Eide, &

Hisle-Gorman, 2010; Huebner, Mancini, Bowen, & Orthner, 2009; Mmari, Roche, Sudhinaraset,

& Blum, 2009).

Despite these outcomes, recent studies have found that supportive and responsive

communities (i.e. military bases, military-impacted communities) and households can help

facilitate the healthy coping of military children and their left-behind parents, experiencing

deployment and other military life events (Amen, Jellen, Merves, & Lee, 1988; Hoshmand &

Hoshmand, 2007; MacDermid, Samper, Schwartz, Nishida, & Nyaronga, 2008). However, this

area of research has ignored the potentially significant role of supportive school environments in

promoting healthy social and emotional outcomes among military children. Military children

have a numerically significant presence in U.S. public schools in civilian communities (Kitmitto

et al., 2011; Yin, Kitmitto, Shkolnik, Hoshen, Hannan, & Arellanes, 2011). According to recent

 

3

estimates from the Department of Defense Educational Activity (DoDEA), there are an estimated

400,000 military children enrolled in American public schools (Kitmitto et al., 2011; Yin et al.,

2011). In addition, 214 civilian public school districts serve a significant proportion of military

children (about 4% of total student enrollment or 400 students) (Kitmitto et al., 2011; Yin et al.,

2011). Surprisingly, to date, only a few recent qualitative studies have examined the social and

emotional experiences of military students in civilian public schools (Bradshaw, Sudhinaraset,

Mmari, & Blum, 2010; Chandra et al., 2010; Mmari et al., 2009). These investigations have

suggested that civilian schools serving significant concentrations of students from military

families, also known as military-connected schools, are struggling to respond to the mental

health challenges and victimization of military children. These studies, however, had exploratory

objectives and small samples. Future studies are needed to assess the relationship between school

climate and the mental health and school victimization of military children.

Overall, there is a gap in research regarding the role that school climate plays in the

social and emotional outcomes of military children. It is unclear how military children perceive

their school’s climate and if these perceptions are generally more negative or positive than their

civilian peers. Also, the research literature has not yet assessed the role of a supportive school

climate in the mental health outcomes and victimization rates of military children. In addition, no

studies have examined if a positive school climate affects the social and emotional outcomes of

military children, given their experiences surrounding deployment. Further, no studies to date

have utilized population samples to address the preceding research objectives. A population

sample could help educational researchers make valid generalizations about the outcomes of

military students and inform school-based interventions to fit the needs of military students.

 

4

Given these gaps in school climate research and the research literature on military

children, this multiple manuscript dissertation will accomplish the following aims:

1. The first aim is to compare the school climate perceptions of students by military

connection (non-military students, students with a military parent, and students with a

military sibling) in military-connected schools.

2. The second aim is to examine associations between school climate and mental health

outcomes among military and non-military students in military-connected schools.

Associations between school climate and mental health outcomes, controlling for

deployment will also be examined.

3. The third aim is to examine associations between school climate and victimization

outcomes among military and non-military students in military-connected schools. The

relationship between school climate and victimization, controlling for deployment will

also be examined.

4. The fourth aim is integrate the joint findings and synthesize the implications of the

studies’ findings for school climate research and practice as they relate to the mental

health outcomes and victimization of students in military-connected schools.

Theoretical Framework

The Role of Supportive School Environments in the Outcomes of Military Students

De Pedro and colleagues (2011) developed a heuristic that provides the context for these

studies within a broader educational research agenda. As seen in the left hand side of Figure 1,

studies have primarily focused on the external risk issues of military children (e.g. deployment),

the protective role of supportive social environments outside the school context (i.e. household,

military community), and their social, emotional, and psychological development (De Pedro et

 

5

al., 2011). In general, these studies have found that military children experience significant

psychological strain and stress from military-related life events, including parental separation

during deployment, multiple school transitions, veteran-war physical and psychological trauma,

the shifting of household roles and responsibilities, and the visible stress of a left-behind parent

(De Pedro et al., 2011). In the Iraq and Afghanistan war context, these studies have found that

when compared to their civilian peers, military students have significantly more adverse mental

health and child maltreatment outcomes (De Pedro et al., 2011; Huebner et al., 2009; Mmari et

al., 2009). This area of research also includes some studies on the resiliency of military children,

which results from the experience of multiple school transitions and repeated and prolonged

deployments. In these studies, military children and adolescents developed healthy coping skills

and resiliency despite repeated parental separation and school transitions when left-behind

parents were financially stable and families had access to military-specific physical and mental

health services (Bradshaw et al., 2010; Hoshmand & Hoshmand, 2007; MacDermid et al., 2008;

Morris & Age, 2009). This area of research has provided a knowledge base surrounding the

protective role of supportive contexts (households, civilian communities, military bases), but

research on the potential role that supportive public schools play in the social, emotional, and

academic outcomes of military children and adolescents still remains scarce.

De Pedro and colleagues (2011) called for future research to focus on the role of

supportive school environments in promoting positive social, emotional, and academic outcomes

among military students (see right hand side of Figure 1). Within the school environment, De

Pedro and colleagues (2011) posit that studies need to focus specifically on the role of school-

level factors such as principal leadership, teacher and peer awareness and support, and school

climate on the social, emotional, and academic outcomes of military students. De Pedro and

 

6

colleagues (2011) also addressed the need for future research on contextual factors that influence

a civilian school’s capacity to respond effectively to the needs of military students. As seen on

the right hand side of Figure 1, these contextual factors include school reform surrounding

military-connected schools and support from universities, military installations, and community

organizations.

Figure 1. Dissertation Studies within the Context of a Research Agenda

 

The studies in this dissertation are situated within the research agenda outlined in Figure

1. This dissertation initiates an area of research that examines the role of a supportive school

environment on the social, emotional, and academic outcomes of military students. Specifically,

these studies examine the school climate of military-connected schools and assess relationships

between school climate and two key social and emotional outcomes among military students,

mental health and victimization.

Military-specific External

risk issues

Family and community

supports

Social, emotional,

and psychological development of military

children

Principal Leadership

Teacher Awareness

and Support

Peer Awareness

support

Social Outcomes

Academic Outcomes

Emotional Outcomes

Supportive School Climate

School Reform for Supportive School Climates and Military Cultural Group

Support from Universities, Community Organizations, and Military Bases Societal Contextual Factors (e.g., popular attitudes toward military)

Military Contextual Factors (e.g. war, military branch)

 

7

Theoretically-Driven Model of School Climate

Research has found that the social, emotional and affective qualities of a school

environment—a school’s climate—influence a wide range of student outcomes. These include

academic outcomes (e.g. attendance, motivation, cooperative learning, test scores), social and

emotional outcomes (e.g. bullying and victimization, risky sexual, violence, alcohol, and drug

use behaviors), and psychological outcomes (e.g. psychiatric problems, depression, anxiety)

(Cohen et al., 2009). The bulk of these studies have focused on students’ mental health outcomes

and rates of school violence victimization.

Though hundreds of studies on school climate have been conducted, it must be noted that

researchers have defined and measured school climate in multiple ways and have examined

school climate from diverse disciplinary perspectives (i.e. public health, psychology, educational

research, criminology) (Cohen et al., 2009; Loukas, Suzuki, & Horton, 2006; Rhodes, Camic,

Milburn, & Lowe, 2009; Wang, Selman, Dishion, & Stormshak, 2009; Zullig et al. 2010). For

instance, one study may define school climate as caring relationships, while another study may

define school climate as academic expectations and meaningful participation in school activities.

The lack of commonly used definitions and measures of school climate across academic

disciplines has created barriers for researchers and educators interested in improving school

climate at a practice level. Without a clear idea of what school climate is, how it should be

measured, and what role it plays in improving student outcomes (i.e. academic, social, and

emotional), it is challenging for practitioners and researchers to develop clear and consistent

strategies for improving school climate on a large scale (i.e. in schools, district-wide, state-wide

and nationally) and to change particular elements of a school’s climate, all to promote more

positive outcomes among specific groups of students (i.e. military students)

 

8

This dissertation utilizes a theoretically-driven school climate framework and measures

representing each construct. Recent reviews of school climate research have asserted the need for

educational researchers to utilize a multidimensional conceptual model and accompanying

measures. Both reviews have posited that there are multiple components of school climate

(Cohen et al., 2009; Zullig et al., 2010). These components include relationships with adults and

peers, peers and adults awareness of student’s family issues, approval of risky behavior, sense of

safety and order, meaningful participation, and belonging (Cohen et al., 2009; Zullig et al.,

2010). Caring relationships is defined as the degree to which students perceive that teachers and

other school adults care about them and provide social and emotional support. Safety involves a

student’s sense of physical security, and sense of social-emotional security, while meaningful

participation is defined as the involvement of the student in relevant, engaging and interesting

opportunities for responsibility and contribution. Risky behavior disapproval is defined as a

student’s perception of peer risky behaviors such as substance use, bullying, weapons

possession, and other risky behaviors in the school context. Belonging involves the extent to

which students feel a sense of belonging and a positive connection with peers and adults in a

school community. Respect for student’s family is defined by the student’s perception that

teachers and peers are aware student’s unique family issues and background. Given the research

on school climate, it is expected that a positive school climate promotes positive mental health

outcomes and lower victimization rates among military and non-military students. The following

sections will describe the multiple dimensions of school climate in detail.

The Multiple Dimensions of School Climate

Caring Relationships. Overall, research suggests that students who have nurturing and

caring social relationships at school have positive long and short-term social-emotional outcomes

 

9

and academic achievement (Brand et al., 2003; Modin & Ostberg, 2009; Zullig et al., 2010).

Relationships include student-adult school staff member relationships, student-to-student

relationships, and relationships among staff members (Brand et al., 2003; Hoy, Smith &

Sweetland, 2002; Modin & Ostberg, 2009; Zullig et al., 2010).

Supportive relationships with teachers have been shown to help students adjust

behaviorally and emotionally to constantly changing school and classroom contexts (i.e.

changing rules and procedures, academic standards). In a study of middle school and early high

school students in urban schools, Brand & colleagues (2003) found that a high level of teacher

emotional support is positively associated with students’ ability to adjust in school, specifically

in decision-making skills and compliance with school rules and procedures. Brand and

colleagues (2003) also found that a high level of teacher social support was associated with a

student's commitment to academic achievement and persistence.

Supportive teacher relationships are also associated with positive mental health outcomes

among students. Classrooms where teachers provide both social and emotional support can serve

as protective spaces for student self-esteem. In a comparative study of Chinese and American

high school students, Jia and colleagues (2009) found that students' perceptions of teacher

support were positively associated with adolescents' self-esteem. Similarly, in a study of high

school students in Sweden, Modin & Ostberg (2009) found that less frequent psychosomatic

complaints occurred in classes with a high frequency of immediate teacher help with their

schoolwork. In contrast, schools characterized as conflictual or supporting interpersonal

informality/familiarity among students and teachers were related to increases in cluster C

(avoidant, dependent, and obsessive-compulsive personality disorder) symptoms.

 

10

Together, supportive teacher and peer relationships are associated with lower bullying

and victimization rates. In a study of Israeli high school students, Marachi, Astor, & Benbenishty

(2006) found that higher levels of teacher support were associated with lower rates of

victimization. Further, when students participated in decision-making they were also less likely

to be victimized in school. Similarly, Wilson (2004) found that caring student-teacher

relationships, student-peer relationships, and respect for authority were inversely related to

physical aggression, and verbal harassment. Research has suggested that in these school

environments, students adopt attitudes and behaviors that prevent school violence. In a study of

high schools in Virginia, Eliot and colleagues (2010) found that in schools where students

perceived more peer and teacher social and emotional support, students tended to endorse

positive attitudes toward seeking help for bullying and threats of violence. Other studies have

also found that supportive relationships among peers and school staff facilitated a sense of trust

and an obligation to be fair, and thus, prevented school violence (Flanagan & Stout, 2010; Hoy et

al., 2002). Given the research on relationships with peers and adults, it is expected that

relationships with peers and adults reduce victimization rates and promote positive mental health

outcomes among all students and within military and non-military student populations.

Safety and Meaningful Participation. The safety and order of a school environment is

comprised of individual and collective perceptions of safety, respect for peers and authority,

acknowledgement of disciplinary policies as fair, and a minimal presence of gangs (Zullig et al.,

2010). Research has found that in schools where violence and discipline policies procedures are

perceived by students as fair and consistently implemented, students are likely to have positive

academic, mental health, and behavioral outcomes. In addition, in schools where students have a

high degree of involvement and decision-making in creating and enforcing rules and procedures,

 

11

students are less likely to engage in violent behaviors and be less victimized (Brand et al., 2003;

Gottfredson et al., 2005).

Not surprisingly, in schools with highly punitive discipline policies, research has found

that students are likely to be fearful of schools and be victims or perpetrators of bullying, which

can adversely affect their academic achievement (Fenning & Rose, 2007; Zullig et al., 2010). In

their research on elementary and high schools students in Israel, students who were personally

victimized by teachers and staff and had a general perception of their school as highly violent

also had a fear of attending. Research literature on the school-to-prison pipeline has suggested

that students, especially African-American and Latino male students, in highly punitive

environments with zero tolerance discipline policies and procedures, are disproportionately

placed in lower tracks and special education, drop out of school, and in the long term, engage in

risky behaviors that lead to imprisonment (Solomon & Palmer, 2006; Opportunity Suspended,

2000).

Research has suggested that in schools where students are active participants in school

violence prevention and safety and violence procedures are consistently implemented and

commonly understood, there are substantial reductions in the rate of bullying and victimization

as well as mental health problems (Brand et al., 2003; Khoury-Kasabri, Benbenishty, & Astor,

2005). In a national study of Israeli secondary students, Khoury-Kassabri & colleagues (2005)

found that in both Jewish and Arab schools, a student’s understanding of school violence policies

and procedures and positive relationships with teachers was negatively associated with serious

physical victimization. In addition, when students are involved in the decision-making process

for responding to school violence, Khoury-Kassabri and colleagues (2005) found significantly

lower rates of all victimization types (e.g. physical, verbal). In a study of American secondary

 

12

students in urban schools, Brand and colleagues (2003) found that consistently implemented

school discipline policies and procedures and students’ perceptions of a clarity of rules and

expectations facilitated students' behavioral adjustment.

Risky Behavior Disapproval. School climate research has also focused on the influence

of student disapproval of risky behavior among peers (i.e. substance use, weapon carrying) and

shared knowledge of discipline policies and procedures. Studies have found that risky behavior

disapproval can serve as protective factors for school violence and negative mental health

problems. In a study of middle school students, Kuperminc, Leadbeater, & Blatt (2001) found

that favorable perceptions of fairness, order and discipline, and a school culture that disapproves

of drug use moderated the negative effects of a lack of self-efficacy on internalizing and

externalizing problems and of a lack of efficacy on internalizing problems. In addition, research

has suggested schools that have a shared perception of fairness and clarity of rules and discipline

can curb the risk of students’ risky behaviors and delinquency in schools within highly violent

communities. In a national study of secondary students, Gottfredson, Gottfredson, Payne, &

Gottfredson (2005) found that students’ perceptions of fairness of rules, clarity of rules,

organizational focus, morale, planning, and administrative leadership explained a substantial

percentage of the variance in all measures of school disorder (i.e. student drug use and violent

behavior), controlling for the effects of community characteristics. Overall, it is expected that a

school community that disapproves of risky behaviors and has clear and consistent discipline

procedures promotes positive mental health outcomes and reduces victimization rates of students

in military-connected schools.

 

13

Belonging and Respect for Family and Cultural Background. The school climate

literature has found that a sense of belonging and a perception that school staff and peers have

awareness and respect for students’ family and cultural backgrounds promote positive well-being

and reduced school violence victimization outcomes. In addition, studies suggest that students

with a great sense of belonging to school adults and peers in a community are less likely to have

psychological issues, are less victimized in school, and are more motivated to attain academic

success (Bond et al., 2007; Wilson, 2004; Bonny, Britto, Klostermann, Hornung, & Slap, 2000).

When compared to disengaged and alienated students, research has found that students

who feel highly connected to a school community have less negative mental health issues. For

instance, secondary students who experienced high social connectedness in school reported

fewer anxiety and depressive symptoms and conduct problems during early adulthood and in

post-secondary settings (i.e. college) (Bond et al., 2007; Loukas et al., 2006). In addition,

students who have positive connectedness to a school community also appear to have less

involvement in risky behaviors. Schools with positive connectedness, for instance, have lower

bullying rates, including physical aggression (Wilson, 2004). Positive belonging is also

associated with lower rates of substance use. For instance, Bond and colleagues (2000) found

that highly connected middle school students were less likely than less connected students to

report regular smoking, drinking, and marijuana use outside of school (Bond et al., 2004). In

addition, Bonny & colleagues (2000) found that highly connected middle school students in

urban districts students reported less use of cigarettes and alcohol.

Research has suggested that strategies and interventions that strengthen belonging may

need to be culturally relevant. Studies have found that disconnected and disaffected students are

disproportionately racial and ethnic minorities, found in urban schools, have low parental

 

14

educational attainment, and male (Bonny et al., 2000.; Skiba, Nardo, & Peterson, 2002).

Culturally relevant pedagogy theorists have posited that racial minority students feel more

connected to a classroom and school community when their cultures and histories are

represented in the curriculum, their languages are utilized in daily instruction, and they are

included in deciding classroom rules and procedures (Hernandez-Sheets, 2003 and 2009;

Ladson-Billings, 1994). Empirically, Brand, Felner, Shim, Seitsinger, & Dumas (2003) found

that schools that were rated by minority students as having higher levels of cultural pluralism and

student participation in decision making were ones in which minority students exhibited

significantly higher levels of behavioral adjustment. Given the preceding studies, it is expected

that a high degree of belonging and a school’s awareness and respect for a student’s family and

cultural background will promote positive mental health outcomes and reduce victimization rates

among students in military-connected schools.

Structure of Dissertation     This dissertation is in a multiple manuscript format as three separate but related studies.

The data in this project were collected in the context of Building Capacity in Military-Connected

Schools. Building Capacity is a consortium of eight military-connected public school districts.

This consortium aims to develop culturally-responsive and supportive school climates in 141

military-connected public elementary, middle, and high schools surrounding military-

installations in the San Diego metropolitan area. The data for these studies are student responses

to the California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS). The CHKS is a comprehensive survey comprised

of several modules that cover demographic information, school climate, bullying and

victimization, resilience, and sexual health issues. In addition, the CHKS includes specialized

modules, including the Military-Connected Module, which is utilized in this dissertation. The

 

15

Military-Connected Module includes items on schooling experiences, mental health, and

demographic items anonymously identifying children with a military parent and/or sibling. The

data were collected in the spring of 2011 by researchers in the Building Capacity in Military-

Connected Schools consortium. The sample is a census of all students in the 5th, 7th, 9th, and 11th

grades in the eight military-connected districts. The data for this study are responses in the core

module and military-connected module from the secondary students in the sample (7th, 9th, and

11th) grades in the eight military-connected districts.

The aim of this multiple manuscript dissertation is to generate multiple studies that can be

readily prepared for a research audience via manuscript submissions to peer-reviewed journals.

The goal of Chapter Two (Study 1) is to provide a macro-level overview of school climate

perceptions by military connection in eight military-connected school districts. Study 1 will

present detailed descriptive statistical analyses of school climate perceptions by military

connection. The school climate constructs under examination will be caring relationships,

belonging, safety, risky behavior disapproval, meaningful participation, and family and cultural

respect. Military-connection includes non-military students, students with a military parent, and

students with a military sibling. This study will examine if school climate perceptions differ by

military connection in a population sample of secondary students in eight military-connected

school districts.

Study 1 will be the first empirical investigation that assesses differences in school climate

perceptions by military connection. The study will explore potential similarities or differences

between military and non-military students across school climate indicators. In addition, unlike

previous studies on school climate, study 1 will be the first study to utilize a theoretically-driven,

multi-dimensional model of school climate. This study will discuss the need for school climate

 

16

studies to determine the perceptions of highly-stressed demographic groups, such as military-

connected students, across the multiple school climate indicators. Study 1 will conclude with a

discussion relating findings to school climate interventions and educational policy surrounding

military students and military-connected schools.

The goal of Chapter Three (Study 2) is to examine the relationship between school

climate and mental health—well-being, depression, and suicidal ideation. Study 2 will present

analyses on the relationship between school climate and mental health, The mental health

constructs under examination include three dimensions—well-being, depression, and suicidal

ideation. Additional analyses also include school-level variables, including school academic

achievement, school poverty, and school military children concentration.

Study 2 will be the first empirical investigation that evaluates the relationship between

school climate and mental health among students in military-connected schools. In addition,

study 2 will be the first study to examine associations between school climate and mental health

(well-being, depression, and suicidal ideation) within non-military and military student

populations. Analyses from this study will also include the relationship between school climate

and each mental health indicator, controlling for deployment. Study 2 will conclude with a

discussion relating the findings to current research and practice surrounding the mental health of

military students and school climate interventions.

The goal of Chapter Four (Study 3) is to examine the relationship between school climate

and school violence-related victimization among students in military-connected schools. Study 3

will present the relationship between school climate and victimization, including an investigation

of the the relationship between school climate and victimization, controlling for deployment.

Several victimization indicators will be under examination. These include being pushed, fear of

 

17

getting beaten up, mean rumors, sexual jokes, rumors on the internet, made fun of looks, having

property stolen and threatened with a weapon.

Study 3 will be the first empirical investigation that evaluates the relationship between

school climate and school violence victimization among military and nonmilitary students in a

military-connected school context. Study 3 will be also the first study to examine how school

climate affects students with either a military parent or a military sibling. Most studies have only

explored parental military connections. This study will also examine the relationships between

deployment, school climate, and victimization. Study 3 will conclude with a discussion relating

the findings to current research and practice surrounding the victimization of military students

and school climate interventions.

Overall, study 2 and study 3 will result in a deeper understanding of the role that school

climate plays in the mental health and school violence victimization of students in military-

connected schools. The last section will synthesize the findings of the three studies and discuss

implications of the findings as they relate to school climate interventions as well as the mental

health outcomes and victimization rates of students, military and non-military, in military-

connected schools.

 

 

18

Chapter Two:

School Climate Perceptions among Students in Military-Connected Schools: A Comparison

of Military and Non-Military Students from the Same Schools

Introduction

An estimated 1.2 million school-aged children of active-duty military service members,

625,000 children from National Guard families, and 705,000 children from Reservist families are

enrolled in civilian-operated schools. These students comprise a significant minority of students

(at least 400 students or more than 10% of total student enrollment) in 214 school districts in the

United States (Kitmitto et al., 2011). Public school districts that serve a significant number of

military students are called military-connected school districts. Although there is a significant

presence of military children in civilian public schools throughout the United States, only two

peer-reviewed publications in educational research have examined the issues of military children

(De Pedro et al., 2011; Esqueda, Astor, & De Pedro, 2012).

Psychological Outcomes of Military Children

In the past decade, research conducted outside of educational research (public health,

medicine, and psychology) has found that students from military families experience daily

stressors that could adversely impact their academic and social functioning (De Pedro et al.,

2011; Chandra, Martin, Hawkins, & Richardson, 2010; Mmari, Roche, Sudhinaraset, & Blum,

2009). In the current Iraq and Afghanistan war context, military children experience tremendous

stress in different social contexts (i.e. household, community, and school). Since the beginning of

the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2002, studies in public health and psychology have found

that military children experience unique stressors and psychological strain as a result of military-

specific life events. These include the stress of left-behind parents (Chandra et al., 2010; Flake,

 

19

Davis, Johnson, & Middleton, 2009), the shifting of household responsibilities (Chandra et al.,

2010; Huebner, Mancini, Bowen, & Orthner, 2009; Mmari et al., 2009), the lack of military-

centric social supports for reservists (Chartrand & Seigel, 2007; Hoshmand & Hoshmand, 2007),

reintegration of the veteran (Galovski & Lyons, 2004; Jordan, Marmar, Fairbank, Schlenger,

Kulka, Hough, & Weiss, 1992; Rosenheck & Nathan, 1986; Solomon, 1988), and school

transitions (Medway & Marchant, 1987).

Research indicates that military life stressors negatively affect the psychological

outcomes of military children in the current context of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. These

studies have found that military children have poorer mental health outcomes than civilian

children due to psychological strain in the present war context. A longitudinal study on military

children, deployments, and mental health found that in 2005 and 2006 behavioral disorders

increased by 19%, stress disorders increased by 18% among military children with a deployed

parent, and the number of mental and behavioral health visits increased by 11% (Gorman, Eide,

& Hisle-Gorman, 2010). In addition, rates increased particularly in adolescents and children of

married and male military parents (Gorman et al., 2010). During the deployment cycle (i.e. pre-

deployment, deployment, reunion, and reintegration), studies have found that left-behind parents

experience tremendous stress and anxiety (Cozza, Chun, & Polo, 2005; Morris & Age, 2009).

Recent research also indicated that military children engage in violent behaviors (i.e. weapon

carrying) and have higher rates of physical and non-physical victimization than their civilian

peers in the school context (Reed, Bell, & Edwards, 2011).

 

20

Research on School Climate’s Impact on At-Risk Student Populations

Teachers, principals, and other school staff interested in making school environments

more responsive and accommodating to the life challenges of military students could focus on

transforming a school’s social and emotional climate. Two recent literature reviews in

educational research have posited that a school’s climate is comprised of multiple components—

caring relationships with adults, a sense of safety, a sense of belonging to the school community,

disapproval of risky behaviors among peers, high levels of meaningful participation in school

procedures and activities, and respect for the family and cultural background of students (Cohen,

McCabe, Michelli, & Pickerall, 2009; Zullig, Koopman, Patton, & Ubbes, 2010). Studies have

indicated that a school’s social and emotional climate promote positive social, emotional, and

academic outcomes among students. This includes higher attendance, enhanced problem solving,

motivation to learn, higher self-esteem, and more frequent help seeking from teachers and other

school staff (Bond et al., 2007; Wilson, 2004; Bonny, Britto, Klostermann, Hornung, & Slap,

2000). In some cases, research has found that school climate protects students from negative

psychological and behavior outcomes. For example, in a study of secondary students in an urban

high school, supportive relationships with teachers were associated with lower levels of anxiety

and depression (Bond et al., 2007). In addition, in schools where students have a strong sense of

safety and order and understanding of school violence policies and procedures, the rate of school

violence and victimization, anxiety, and depression is substantially reduced (Marachi, Astor, &

Benbenishty, 2006). Furthermore, students who feel they belong to a school community have

reported fewer anxiety and depressive symptoms and conduct problems (Bond, Butler, Thomas,

Carlin, Glover, Bowes, & Patton, 2007; Loukas, Suzuki, & Horton, 2006).

 

21

Studies have also suggested that a supportive school climate can curb rates of negative

mental health outcomes and school violence among historically oppressed student populations

(Ladson-Billings, 1994; Lynch & Cicchetti, 1997; McGuire, Toomey, & Russell, 2010;

Townsend, 2000). In the United States, for instance, studies conducted in high poverty urban

schools primarily serving Latino and African-American students suggest that different elements

of school climate (i.e. caring relationships with teachers, belonging, meaningful participation in

creating school discipline policies and procedures, and staff respect and awareness of students’

family issues) significantly reduce mental health problems and victimization rates among

African-American and Latino students with low SES status (Ladson-Billings, 1994; Lynch &

Cicchetti, 1997; Townsend, 2000). Studies on the protective role of school climate in negative

mental health, school violence, and disciplinary issues have been conducted among different

student populations (Marachi, Astor, & Benbenishty, 2006; McEvoy & Welker, 2000; McGuire,

Anderson, Toomey, & Russell, 2010).

The Experiences of Military Children in Civilian Public School Environments

A large proportion of military-connected students, about 80%, attend schools in districts

where military-connected students are a significant minority of students (Kitmitto et al., 2011).

Public schools that serve a significant number or proportion of military students (about 400

military students or 4% of total student enrollment) are known as military-connected schools

(Kitmitto et al., 2011). In the context of military-connected schools, recent public health research

suggests that students in military families may have more negative social and emotional climate

perceptions than civilian students (Bradshaw et al., 2010; Chandra et al., 2010; Mmari et al.,

2009). Qualitative studies on military-connected schools have found that military-connected

school teachers, principals, and other school staff lack awareness and appropriate strategies to

 

22

address the social, emotional and academic needs of military children (Bradshaw et al., 2010;

Chandra et al., 2010; Mmari et al., 2009). For instance, military children reported feeling

misunderstood by school staff members and peers, having difficulty making friends, and

challenges with adjusting to the policies and procedures of a new school after a school transition

(Mmari et al., 2009). Research also indicates that military children are engaging in violent

behaviors in civilian public schools (Mmari et al., 2009; Reed et al., 2011). In addition, Mmari

and colleagues (2009) found that military adolescents with deployed parents exhibited behavior

problems, had fights with other students at school, and had frequent incidences of victimization

by anti-war perpetrators.

The preceding studies indicate that some military students have had negative perceptions

of the social and emotional qualities of their civilian schools. However, the preceding studies

were small in scale, had exploratory objectives, and did not provide detailed comparisons of the

school climate perceptions of military and non-military students in the same schools. In addition,

these studies had exploratory objectives and did not utilize multi-dimensional theoretical

frameworks to provide a systematic understanding of how military children perceive their school

environments. Hence, it is not clear if military students have more negative perceptions than non-

military students. To draw comparisons of school climate perceptions among military and non-

military students, future studies need to utilize large population samples of military and non-

military students in the same schools and employ a school climate conceptual model comprised

of multiple components of school climate (i.e. caring relationships, belonging, safety, meaningful

participation, risky behavior disapproval, and respect for family and cultural background of

students). Findings from these studies can better inform current public school reforms focused on

military-connected schools as well as current school climate interventions.

 

23

Hence, the goal of this study is to describe the school climate perceptions of students in

military-connected schools and to compare student perceptions of school climate by military

connection. This study utilizes a theoretically-driven school climate model, which includes the

following constructs: belonging, caring relationships, meaningful participation, respect for

family and cultural background, safety, and risky behavior disapproval. Educational researchers

and practitioners can utilize findings from this study to understand how military and non-military

students perceive the social and emotional qualities of public school environments.

Methods

The data from this dissertation is drawn from two sources. The main source of data is the

California Healthy Kids Survey. This study also incorporated some school-level data on

academic achievement and school demographics, publicly available from the California

Department of Education.

Core and Military-Connected Modules

One of the data sources utilized in this study is the 2011 California Healthy Kids Survey

(CHKS). The data from the California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) is comprised of individual

level data where individuals are also identified by school, county, and local educational agency

(i.e. public school district) (Austin, Bates, & Duerr, 2011). The CHKS is the largest statewide

survey of resiliency, protective factors, and risk behaviors in the United States and is collected

from students at the elementary, middle, and high school levels (Austin et al., 2011). The CHKS

is comprised of several modules, including the core module. The core module includes data on

demographics (e.g. age, grade, gender, race and ethnicity), health-related behaviors, tobacco use,

drug use, violence behaviors, bullying, victimization, and school climate (Austin et al., 2011).

 

24

The CHKS also includes the military-connected module. In 2010, a research team at the

University of Southern California and West Ed collaborated to create the CHKS military-

connected module in response to a growing awareness among researchers and educators on the

social, emotional, psychological and academic needs of military children. Congress directed the

U.S. Department of Education (DoE) and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) to address these

gaps (U.S. Department of Defense, 2008). The military-connected module is administered to

parents, school staff, and students to gather their views of their schools and the educational,

developmental, and health-related needs of students (Austin et al., 2011). The military connected

module includes military demographic items as well as items on deployment, school transitions,

family dynamics, parent-school relationships, mental health, and positive well-being. The student

military connected module is administered to both military and non-military students in military-

connected schools (Austin et al., 2011).

The present study utilizes data from both the core module and military-connected

modules collected in Spring 2011. The CHKS core module included 115 items in the middle

school version and 126 items in the high school version.

Data Collection Procedure

The CHKS core module and the military-connected module were administered in the

Spring of 2011 in eight military-connected school districts serving elementary, middle, and high

school students, surrounding military bases in the San Diego metropolitan area. The participating

schools were required to survey all students in grades 5, 7, 9, and 11. Since the focus of this

dissertation is on secondary students, data collected from 7th, 9th, and 11th graders will be

analyzed. Prior to the survey administered at a secondary school site, parental consent was

gathered for each participating student. Surveys were also sealed in envelopes for classrooms in

 

25

schools. The envelopes reported the number of students absent in these classes at the day of the

survey. There were 599 envelopes. The surveys were administered by school staff members or

by USC researchers. Proctoring instructions and trainings were given to all survey administrators

and an introductory script was read to the participating students. Participants were encouraged to

answer questions honestly and assured their responses would remain anonymous. Participants

were allowed to withdraw from the survey at any time. The core and military-connected modules

took approximately two hours to complete.

The data used in this study is a subsample of 14,943 7th, 9th and 11th graders, The overall

number of enrolled students eligible to participate in the survey was 18,701. Absent students and

students whose parents refused permission to participate in the study were excluded from the

study sample. The final response rate was 86.73%.

Measures

The following variables and indices taken from the California Healthy Kids Survey

(CHKS) are constructed based on theoretically driven constructs. The following paragraphs

describe the scales and variables used in the model.

Race and Ethnicity. As seen in Table 1, two items were used to determine the racial and

ethnic backgrounds of the participants. Participants were asked, “What is your race?” the

possible responses were 1 = American Indian or Alaska Native, 2 = Asian, 3= Black or African-

American, 5 = Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and 6 = White. Another item asked, “Are

you of Hispanic or Latino origin?” The possible responses were 1) Yes and 2) No. A variable

was computed for race and ethnicity and the categories were 1) Asian/AI/NH/PI 2) Black 3)

White 4) Mixed 5) Hispanic/Latino

 

26

Grade level. One item was used to determine the grade of the participants. Participants

were asked, “What grade are you in? The possible responses were 1) 6th grade, 2) 7th grade, 3) 8th

grade, 4) 9th grade, 5) 10th grade, 6) 11th grade, 7) 12th grade, and 8) Other grade

Gender. Participants were asked to report their gender. They were asked, “What is your

sex?” and the possible responses were 1 = male and 2 = female. The items were recoded as 0 =

female and 1 = male.

Military Connection. One item was used to determine a respondent’s military

connection. Participants were asked to report their connection to the military in one item. The

item asks participants, “Who in your family is in the military (Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force,

national Guard or Reserves)?” the possible responses were 1 = No one in my family is in the

military, 2 = Father, 3 = Mother, 4 = Brother or sister, and 5 = Grandparent or other relative.

Based on the literature, military connection is defined as having a parent or sibling serving in the

military (De Pedro et al., 2011; Rodriguez & Margolin, 2011) . Thus, the variable was recoded

with the following categories: 0) Not in the military 1) Having a military parent and 2) Having a

military sibling.

Table 1. Domains, Scales and Items for the Demographic Variables Variable Items Gender “What is your sex?”

Respondents chose one of the following: A) Male and B) Female. Grade “What grade are you in?”

Respondents chose one of the following: A) 6th grade; B) 7th grade; C) 8th grade; D) 9th grade; E) 10th grade; F) 11th grade; G) 12th grade; H) Other grade; I) Ungraded

Race and Ethnicity “What is your race?” Possible responses included A) American Indian or Alaska Native; B) Asian; C) Black or African American; D) Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander; E) White; F) Mixed (two or more) races. “Are you of Hispanic or Latino origin?” Respondents chose one of the following: A) No; B) Yes

(Table 1 continued)

 

27

(Table 1 continued) Military Connection

“Who in your family is in the military (Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, National Guard, or Reserves)? Respondents could mark more than one of the following answers: A) No one in my family is in the military; B) Father; C) Mother; D) Brother or sister; E) Grandparent or other relative; F) Don’t know

As seen in Table 2, this study covers multiple dimensions of school climate, including

sense of safety, relationship with adults, belonging, and peer risky climate, and meaningful

participation. In addition, the school climate literature has found that a school’s respect for a

student’s family life and cultural background moderates the effect of school climate on mental

health and victimization.

Safety. Two items asked respondents about their perceptions of safety in their schools (α

= .812). One item is “I feel safe in my school.” The responses to this item were on a five point

Likert scale and ranged from 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neither disagree or agree,

4 = Agree, and 5 = Strongly agree. The second item is “How safe do you feel when you are at

school?” The responses to this item were 1 = Very safe, 2 = Safe, 3 = Neither safe nor unsafe, 4

= Unsafe, and 5 = Very unsafe. The item responses were not congruent. This item was recoded

as 1 = Very Unsafe, 2 = Unsafe, 3 = Neither safe nor unsafe, 4 = Safe, 5= Very Safe. The second

item was reverse coded.

Caring Relationships. In this scale, participants were asked about their relationships

with adults in the school (α = .880). Six items were used for this construct: At my school, there is

a teacher or some other adult who tells me I do a good job; who tells me when I do good; who

notices when I’m not there; who always wants me to do my best; who listens to me when I have

something to say; who believes I will be a success. The responses to these items were on a four-

 

28

point Likert scale and ranged from 1 = Not at all true, 2= A little true, 3 = Pretty much true, and

4 = Very much true.

Belonging. In this scale, participants were asked about their sense of belonging (α =

.797). Three items were used for this construct: Strongly agree or disagree with, I feel close to

people at this school; I am happy to be at this school; I feel like I am part of this school The

possible responses to these items were on a five-point Likert scale and ranged from 1 = Strongly

disagree, 2= Disagree, 3 = Neither disagree or agree, 4 = Agree, and 5 = Strongly agree.

Risky Behavior Disapproval. In this scale, participants were asked about their

perceptions of risky behaviors (α = .900). Five items were used for this construct: How do you

feel about someone your own age smoking one or more packs of cigarettes a day; having one or

more drinks of alcohol every day; trying marijuana or hashish; using marijuana once a month or

more, carrying a weapon to school The possible responses to these items were on a three-point

Likert scale and ranged from 1 = Neither approve or disapprove, 2= Somewhat disapprove, and 3

= Strongly disapprove.

Meaningful Participation. In this scale, participants were asked about their meaningful

participation at school (α = .742). Three items were used for this construct: I do interesting

activities at school; At school, I help decide things like class activities; I do things that make a

difference. The possible responses to these items were on a four-point Likert scale and ranged 1

= Not at all true, 2= A little true, 3 = Pretty much true, and 4 = Very much true.

Respect for Family. One item asked participants to report their school peer’s

understanding for their family life. The item was “Other students in school do not really

understand my family life.” One item asked participants to report school adult’s understanding

for their family life. The item was “Adults in this school respect my family life.” The possible

 

29

responses to the two items were 1 = Not at all true, 2= A little true, 3 = Pretty much true, 4 =

Very much true. In order to maintain categorical consistency with the other variables, the item

was recoded as 1 = Very much true, 2 Pretty much true, 3 = A little true, and 4 = Not at all true.

Table 2. Domains, Scales and Items for the School Climate Variables Variable Items Belonging “Strongly agree or disagree with…

…I feel close to people at this school.” …I am happy to be at this school.” …I feel like I am part of this school.” The possible responses to these items were A) Strongly disagree; 2) Disagree; 3) Neither disagree or agree; 4) Agree; 5) Strongly agree.

Caring Relationships

“At my school there is a teacher or some other adult who… …tells me I do a good job.” …tells me when I do good.” …who notices me when I’m not there.” …who always wants me to do my best.” …who notices when I’m not there.” …who always wants me to do my best.” …who listens to me when I have something to say.” …who believes I will be a success.” The possible responses to these items were A) Not at all true; 2) A little true; 3) Pretty much true; 4) Very much true;

Safety “I feel safe in my school.” The possible responses to this item were A) Strongly Disagree; 2) Disagree; 3) Neither disagree or agree; 4) Agree; 5) Strongly agree. “How safe do you feel when you are at school?” The possible responses to this item were A) Very safe; B) Safe; C) Neither safe nor unsafe; D) Unsafe; E) Very unsafe.

Meaningful Participation

“At school… …I do interesting things at school.” …I help decide things like class activities.” …I do things that make a difference.” The possible responses to this item were A) Not at all true; B) A little true; C) Pretty much true; D) Very much true; E) Don’t know.

(Table 2 continued)

 

30

(Table 2 continued) Risky Behavior Disapproval

“How do you feel about… …someone your own age smoking one or more packs of cigarettes a day.” …having one or more drinks of alcohol every day.” …trying marijuana or hashish.” …using marijuana once a month or more.” …carrying a weapon to school.” The possible responses to this item were A) Neither approve nor disapprove; B) Somewhat disapprove; C) Strongly disapprove

Respect for Family

“Adults in this school respect my family.” “Other students in school do not really understand my family.” The possible responses to this item were A) Not at all true; B) A little true; C) Pretty much true; D) Very much true; E) Don’t know.

Analytical Plan

The aim of this study is to describe the school climate perceptions of students in military-

connected schools and to compare student perceptions of school climate by military connection.

Descriptive analyses were conducted to compare the school climate perceptions of non-military

students, students with a military parent, and students with a military sibling. As seen in Tables

4-9, bivariate analyses (i.e cross-tabulations) were conducted to determine differences in

percentages among non-military students, students with a military parent, and students with a

military sibling. Bivariate statistical analyses (i.e. chi-square tests of association) were then

conducted to determine associations between each school climate item and military connection.

In addition, Tables 4-9 show that multiple items comprise each construct of school climate.

Results

Sample Characteristics

As seen in Table 3, about 14% of respondents had a connection to the military. 9.3% of

respondents reported having a military parent, while 4.3% reported having a sibling in the

military. As shown in Table 1, approximately half of the respondents were female (51.7%) and

Hispanic (50.3%). White students represented 27.3% of students surveyed. Black students

 

31

comprised the smallest racial group (3.0%). The proportions of 7th, 9th, and 11th graders were

approximately equal. 32.9% of respondents reported being in the 7th grade, 35.2% reported being

in the 9th grade, and 31.9% reported being in the 11th grade. There was an overrepresentation of

Asian students (12.1%) among respondents with a military parent and an overrepresentation of

Black students among respondents with a military parent (7.2%), while there was an

underrepresentation of Hispanic students with a military parent (44.8%).

Table 3. Sample Characteristics for Study #1 (n= 14,943) Total

N(%) No one in

the military (n=12,990)

Parent (N=1396)

Sibling (N=649)

Gender Female Male

7606 (51.7%) 7181 (48.6%)

51.5 48.5

51.1 48.9

50.9 49.1

Grade 7th 9th 11th

4588 (32.9%) 4908 (35.2%) 4446 (31.9%)

32.3 35.4 32.3

40.6 33.6 25.8

25.6 33.9 37.5

Race/Ethnicity Asian/AI/HI/AN Black White Mixed Race Hispanic

1189 (8.2%) 432 (3.0%) 3948 (27.3%) 1606 (11.1%) 7261 (50.3%)

7.9 2.5 27.3 10.3 52.0

12.1 7.2 25.6 18.1 36.9

7.1 4.0 31.7 12.3 44.8

Military Connection and School Climate

Overall, there were several bivariate associations between military connection and

several items across the six school climate dimensions. These associations showed that students

with a military parent and students with a military sibling had more negative school climate

perceptions. In particular, compared to the non-military students and students with a military

sibling, students with a military parent have a lower sense of belonging, lack caring

relationships, and feel less safe. Also, students with a military sibling have more ambivalent

perceptions of risky behaviors than non-military students and reported more and slightly more

 

32

negative perceptions of school awareness than students who had no connection to the military

and students with a military parent. No significant differences were identified in meaningful

participation by military connection.

Belonging. As seen in Table 4, students who had a military parent and students with a

military sibling reported having slightly more negative perceptions of belonging than students

with no military connection. Significant bivariate associations were found between military

connection and feeling close to people at their school (X2=21.867, df=8, p<0.05). In response to

the item, “I feel close to people at this school,” 6.6% of students with a military parent and 6.2%

of students with a military sibling strongly disagreed, compared to 5.6% of non-military students.

A significant bivariate association was also found between military connection and the item “I

am happy to be at this school” (X2= 65.021, df=8, p<0.0001). In response to this item, 10.7% of

students with military parents and 8.9% of students with a military sibling strongly disagreed,

compared to 7.2% of non-military students. A significant bivariate association was also found

between military connection and and students’ feeling part of their school (X2= 52,086, df=8,

p<0.0001). 11.2% of students with a military parent and 10.3% of students with a military sibling

strongly disagreed, compared to the 7.6% of non-military students who strongly disagreed.

Table 4. Perceptions of Belonging by Military Connection Status (n=14,943) Total

Non

Military (n=12,990)

Military Parent

(n=1396)

Military Sibling (n=649)

I feel close to people at this school* Strongly disagree Disagree Neither disagree/agree Agree Strongly Agree

5.7 7.7 23.0 42.6 21.0

5.6 7.4 22.8 43.1 21.1

6.6 9.1 24.4 39.7 20.1

6.2 10.3 24.5 38.5 20.5

(Table 4 continued)

 

33

(Table 4 continued) I am happy to be at this school** Strongly disagree Disagree Neither disagree/agree Agree Strongly Agree

7.6 7.7 22.4 40.0 22.3

7.2 7.4 22.1 40.4 22.8

10.7 10.6 24.3 37.5 16.8

8.9 7.8 23.4 37.4 22.4

I feel like I am part of this school** Strongly disagree Disagree Neither disagree/agree Agree Strongly Agree

8.0 10.8 27.7 37.2 16.4

7.6 10.8 27.7 37.2 16.4

11.2 13.1 27.6 34.7 13.4

10.3 12.2 24.4 34.1 19.1

*Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p < .05 **Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p <.001

Safety. Table 5 also shows that students with a military parent feel slightly less safe at

school than students with no military connection. Significant bivariate associations were found

between military connection and the item “I feel safe at my school” (X2= 51.467, df=8,

p<0.0001). In response to the item, “I feel safe at my school,” 7.1% of non-military students

strongly disagreed, compared to 10.5% of students with a military parent. Military connection

was also significantly associated with a second safety item, “How safe do you feel when you are

at school?” (X2= 41.678, df=8, p<0.0001). About 4.8% of students with a military parent

responded with “very unsafe,” which is slightly higher than the 3.2% of non-military students

who marked the same response. About 2.8% of students with a military sibling reported feeling

very unsafe, slightly lower than both non-military students and students with a military parent.

 

34

Table 5. Perceptions of Safety by Military Connection Status (n=14,943) School Climate Dimensions and Items Total

Non

Military (n=12,990)

Military Parent

(n=1,318)

Military Sibling (n=635)

I feel safe in my school** Strongly disagree Disagree Neither disagree/agree Agree Strongly Agree

7.4 8.7 25.6 40.2 18.1

7.1 8.3 25.7 40.6 18.3

10.5 11.8 25.7 36.6 15.4

8.0 10.0 23.5 39.0 19.6

How safe do you feel when you are at school?** Very safe Safe Neither safe nor unsafe Unsafe Very Unsafe

18.9 42.3 30.4 5.1 3.3

19.0 42.6 30.4 4.8 3.2

17.7 39.9 29.5 8.1 4.8

19.7 40.3 31.4 5.7 2.8

*Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p < .05 **Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p <.001 Caring Relationships. As seen in Table 6, students with military parents reported

slightly less caring relationships with teachers and other school adults than non-military students

in all items. Significant bivariate associations were found between military connection and

feeling that a teacher really cares (X2= 22.150, df=6, p<0.05), having a teacher or adult who

listens to what they have to say (X2=14.682, df=6, p<0.05), feeling that there is a teacher who

believes that they will be a success (X2= 23.696, df=6, p<0.05), and feeling that there is teacher

or adult who notices when they are not there (X2= 18.922, df=6, p<0.05). Slightly higher rates of

negative relationships were found among students with a military parent. For example, in

response to the item, “A teacher or adult who really cares about me,” 14.1% of students with a

military parent responded with “not at all true,” compared to 10.9% of non-military students. In

response to the item, “A teacher or adult tells me when I do a good job,” about 9.6% of students

with a military parent responded with “not at all true,” which is slightly higher than non-military

students (7.7%). In addition, about 11.7% of students with a military parent reported “not at all

 

35

true” to the item “There is a teacher who listens to me when I have something to say,” compared

to 9.7% of non-military students. In response to the item “There is a teacher or adult who notices

when I’m not there,” about 15.7% of students with a military parent reported “not at all true,”

while a slightly lower proportion of non-military students (12.6%) reported “not at all true.”

Table 6. Perceptions of Caring Relationships by Military Connection Status (n=14,943) A teacher or adult who…

Total

Non Military

(n=12,990)

Military Parent

(n=1,318)

Military Sibling (n=635)

Really cares about me* Not at all true A little true Pretty much true Very much true

11.2 29.6 33.0 26.1

10.9 29.7 33.3 26.1

14.1 30.1 31.2 24.6

10.6 26.9 31.5 31.0

Tells me when I do a good job Not at all true A little true Pretty much true Very much true

7.9 20.3 35.0 36.8

7.7 20.3 35.2 36.8

9.6 21.1 33.9 35.4

8.6 18.5 32.8 40.1

Wants me to do my best Not at all true A little true Pretty much true Very much true

5.5 15.0 30.4 49.1

5.4 15.1 30.5 49.0

6.6 15.0 30.1 48.3

5.8 13.3 27.4 53.5

Listens to me when I have something to say* Not at all true A little true Pretty much true Very much true

9.9 22.0 34.9 33.2

9.7 21.7 35.1 33.4

11.7 24.1 34.4 29.9

9.7 22.9 32.4 35.0

Who believes I will be a success** Not at all true A little true Pretty much true Very much true

9.5 18.7 31.0 40.8

9.1 18.7 31.3 40.9

11.8 19.9 29.5 38.9

11.8 15.4 28.5 44.3

Who notices when I’m not there * Not at all true A little true Pretty much true Very much true

12.9 24.9 32.5 29.8

12.6 24.9 32.9 29.5

15.7 24.2 29.5 30.5

13.3 24.3 29.4 33.1

*Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p < .05 **Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p <.001

 

36

Meaningful Participation. No significant bivariate associations were found between

military connection and each of the three meaningful participation items. As seen in Table 7, the

data show that students with a military parent have lower rates of meaningful participation than

non-military students. Significantly different rates by military connection were found in the item,

“I help decide things like class activities or rules.” About 54.3% of students with a military

parent reported “not at all true,” compared to 51.5% of non-military students. Similar proportions

were found in the items, “I do interesting activities at school” and “I do things that make a

difference.”

Table 7. Perceptions of Meaningful Participation by Military Connection Status (n=14,943) Total

Non

Military (N=12,990)

Military Parent

(N=1,318)

Military Sibling

(N=635) I do interesting activities at school Not at all true A little true Pretty much true Very much true

19.0 25.9 25.9 29.1

19.4 26.0 25.8 28.9

19.0 25.8 25.8 29.3

18.7 24.9 24.9 31.5

I help decide things like class activities or rules* Not at all true A little true Pretty much true Very much true

51.7 26.4 13.8 8.1

51.5 26.8 13.8 7.9

54.3 23.8 13.3 8.7

52.3 23.5 13.1 11.2

I do things that make a difference Not at all true A little true Pretty much true Very much true

28.1 34.1 22.7 15.0

28.3 34.0 22.7 14.9

28.5 34.0 22.3 15.2

27.6 32.0 22.7 17.7

*Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p < .05 **Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p <.001

Risky Behavior Disapproval. Analyses of military connection and risky behavior

approval suggest that students with a military sibling are slightly more ambivalent of risky

behaviors than students with a military parent and non-military students. Table 8 shows that a

 

37

significant bivariate association was found between military connection and approval of peers

having one or more drinks ever day (X2= 103.826, df=4, p<0.05). Compared to 23.9% of non-

military students and 22.7% of students with a military parent, about 26.1% of students with a

military sibling responded “neither approve or disapprove” to having one or more drinks of

alcohol every day. There were also significant associations between military connection and

approval of peers trying marijuana or hashish (X2= 23.516, df=4, p<0.0001) and using marijuana

once a month or more (X2= 21.782, df=4, p<0.0001). Students with a military sibling also

responded slightly higher rates of “neither approve or disapprove” to trying marijuana or hashish

(37.5%) and using marijuana once a month or more (35.4%). However, the association between

military connection and carrying a weapon to school was not significant.

Table 8. Perceptions of Risky Behavior Approval by Military Connection Status (n=14,943) Total

Non

Military (n=12,990)

Military Parent

(n=1,318)

Military Sibling (n=635)

Smoking one or more packs of cigarettes Neither approve or disapprove Somewhat disapprove Strongly disapprove

20.5 14.3 65.1

21.1 14.5 64.5

18.9 14.1 67.0

22.3 14.2 63.5

Having one or more drinks of alcohol every day* Neither approve or disapprove Somewhat disapprove Strongly disapprove

22.7 19.6 56.9

23.9 19.9 56.2

22.7 17.1 60.2

26.1 18.6 55.4

Trying marijuana or hashish** Neither approve or disapprove Somewhat disapprove Strongly disapprove

36.2 19.1 44.8

36.8 19.2 44.0

33.5 15.9 50.6

37.5 19.5 43.1

Using marijuana once a month or more** Neither approve or disapprove Somewhat disapprove Strongly disapprove

33.9 17.0 49.0

34.6 17.3 48.1

30.3 15.0 54.8

35.4 16.5 48.1

(Table 8 continued)

 

38

(Table 8 continued) Carrying a weapon to school Neither approve or disapprove Somewhat disapprove Strongly disapprove

16.3 9.9 73.8

16.9 9.9 73.2

15.0 9.7 75.3

15.7 10.9 73.4

How would your friends feel about you smoking one or more packs of cigarettes a day? Neither approve or disapprove Somewhat disapprove Strongly disapprove

15.2 17.0 67.9

15.7 16.8 67.5

14.6 18.5 66.9

16.7 16.1 67.3

*Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p < .05 **Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p <.001

Respect for Family. As seen in Table 9, the data suggests that students with a military

sibling have slightly more negative perceptions of peer relationships than students with a military

parent and non-military students. There was one significant bivariate association—military

connection and the item “Other students in school do not really understand me ” (X2= 46.290,

df=6, p<0.0001). In response to the item, “Adults in this school respect my family,” about 26.4%

of students with a military sibling responded with “very much true,” which is slightly higher than

the proportion of non-military students (22.1%) and students with a military parent (25.1%).

Table 9. Perceptions of Respect for Family by Military Connection Status (n=14,943) Total

Non

Military (N=12,990)

Military Parent

(N=1,318)

Military Sibling

(N=635) Adults in this school respect my family Not at all true A little true Pretty much true Very much true

15.7 22.7 31.7 30.7

15.5 21.8 31.7 31.0

17.7 24.5 30.2 27.5

14.3 23.5 30.1 32.1

Other students do not really understand me** Not at all true A little true Pretty much true Very much true

32.6 26.7 18.7 22.1

32.6 26.7 18.7 22.1

26.5 26.5 21.8 25.1

28.0 23.1 22.5 26.4

*Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p < .05 **Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p <.001

 

39

Discussion

Studies have examined the social, emotional, and psychological outcomes of military

children during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars (Chartrand & Seigel, 2007; Gorman et al., 2009;

Hoshmand & Hoshmand, 2007; Huebner et al., 2009). These studies suggest that many teachers,

principals, and other staff in civilian public schools lack awareness and strategies for responding

to the social, emotional, and academic issues of students from military families. In addition,

these studies suggest that a large proportion of military students have more negative school

climate perceptions than civilian students. However, these studies were qualitative, had

exploratory objectives, and did not utilize comprehensive theoretical frameworks of school

climate.

The purpose of this study was to describe the school climate perceptions of military and

non-military students in civilian public schools. This study utilized data from a large population

survey of students in the 7th, 9th, and 11th grades from schools in military-connected school

districts. Bivariate statistical analyses were conducted to compare rates of school climate—

belonging, caring relationships, safety, meaningful participation, respect for family, and risky

behavior disapproval—among non-military students, students with a military parent, and

students with a military sibling. Bivariate statistical analyses were conducted to evaluate

associations between military connection and each school climate construct.

Findings from this study provide descriptive and quantitative empirical evidence that

military-connected students have more negative perceptions of their school environments than

non-military students. The results show that military-connected students consistently reported

significantly lower perceptions of belonging, less supportive relationships with teachers and

other school adults, and lower meaningful participation rates than non military-connected

 

40

students on all items. This general finding supports recent qualitative studies on the negative

schooling experiences of students from military families.

In addition, this investigation provides rates of school climate perceptions for two

different groups of military-connected students—students with a military parent and students

with a military sibling. The results show that the social and emotional experiences of a school

environment differ by type of military connection. In particular, bivariate statistical analyses

indicated that students with a military parent reported slightly lower rates of belonging, caring

relationships, meaningful participation, and safety than students with a military sibling and non-

military students. Students with a military sibling reported however, more negative perceptions

of respect for family and lower rates of risky behavior disapproval than students with a military

parent and non-military students. However, the results indicated that there were very small rate

differences in school climate perceptions between the military-connected groups— students with

a military parent and students with a military sibling. Moreover, on all indicators, either military-

connected group reported more negative school climate perceptions than non-military students

on all items. This pattern suggests that the psychological impact of having a military sibling may

be similar to the impact of having a military parent.

Studies on children and/or adolescents with a military sibling are scarce. Almost all

studies on military children and adolescents have investigated stressors stemming from having a

parent in the military. However, there is little research that has investigated the psychological

stressors and experiences of adolescents with a military sibling (Rodriguez & Margolin, 2011). A

recent qualitative study found that adolescents with military siblings experienced stress and

anxiety stemming from the grief of a parent, the temporary breakdown of a sibling bond, and

alienation from social supports (Rodriguez & Margolin, 2011). Moreover, psychological

 

41

theorists have posited that the sibling bond is the most enduring familial bond and heavily

influences an adolescent’s attitudes toward norms regarding risky behaviors (Rodriguez &

Margolin, 2011). More research is needed to understand the schooling experiences of students

with siblings serving in the military.

This study’s findings on school climate perceptions also suggest that staff at military-

connected schools need more awareness and strategies for accommodating the needs and

challenges of military students. Studies have found that school-based extra-curricular activities,

sports and other pro-social school activities with peers facilitate belongingness and academic

achievement for students (Camp, 2000; Perkins & Jones, 2003). Military-connected secondary

students who allocate increased time and energy to household chores and raising younger

siblings are likely to have lower participation rates in school activities than non military-

connected students. Hence, military-connected schools may need to incorporate more flexibility

in providing meaningful participation opportunities to military-connected students (i.e. clubs and

other extracurricular activities specifically for students experiencing the deployment of a family

member.

In addition, recent studies have found military-connected students on average have nine

school transitions from kindergarten to the 12th grade (Bradshaw et al., 2010; U.S. Department of

Defense, 2008). While some military-connected school districts have established transition

planning centers and identification procedures, recent studies and technical reports have found

that public schools do not have established procedures for facilitating school transitions for

military-connected students or students in general (Bradshaw et al., 2010). The lack of

identification presents a challenge for military-connected school principals, teachers and other

school staff in assessing the proportion of students who are military-connected and determining

 

42

if a significant proportion of a student body is experiencing significant stress from deployment

and other military life events. In addition, the lack of transition procedures prevents school staff

from providing military-connected students with appropriate academic, social and emotional

supports. These include providing school accommodations (i.e. flexible attendance policies when

parents return from deployment) that help military-connected students succeed academically

while living daily with military life events. Overall, identification and careful transition planning

could assist teachers in developing a school environment that is culturally responsive to the

schooling experiences of military-connected students.

This study provides a large scale nonclinical perspective of the school climate

perceptions of students in military-connected schools. In addition, comparisons were made

between military and non-military students enrolled in the same school and living in the same

neighborhoods and communities. The scope of this study provided a detailed description of

school climate. Future research needs to examine the impact of a supportive school climate on

social and emotional outcomes known to impact academic achievement such as mental health

and victimization among military-connected students and non-military students. In addition,

military-connected schools widely vary in contextual factors such as school level academic

achievement, socioeconomic status, and concentration of military-connected students. Future

studies need to investigate associations between school-level factors and mental health and

victimization.

Limitations

There are several limitations in this study that are worth noting. First, this study excluded

students from continuation/community day schools. This may have affected the statistical

analyses, since it is feasible that there is an underrepresentation of high-risk secondary students

 

43

in this study. Second, military connection was defined in two mutually exclusive categories—

students who currently have a parent serving in the military and students who currently have a

sibling serving in the military. A very small proportion of students reported having a grandparent

or other relative who are currently serving in the military. This categorization of military-

connected and non-military students was driven by the research literature (De Pedro et al., 2011;

Rodriguez & Margolin, 2011). These studies have indicated that having a direct family member

in the military (i.e. parent or sibling) is associated with stress and adverse psychological

outcomes among military adolescents. Third, the survey utilized in this study does include items

specifying military students to report if their parents or siblings serve as full-time active duty

service members, Reservists, or National Guard. Military branch is also not specified. Recent

studies have found that the deployment experiences of Reservists and National Guard families

are qualitatively different from families of full-time, active-duty service members (Bowen,

Mancini, Martin, Ware, & Nelson, 2003; MacDermid, Samer, Schwarz, Nishida, & Nyaronga,

2008; Rohall, Weschler, & Segal, 1999). Reservist families, for instance, typically reside in

civilian communities and have a lack of access to social supports and health care providers who

are aware of military culture and life stressors (Bowen et al., 2003). Last, the cross-sectional

design of this study does not allow cause and effect relationships.

Implications

This study is positioned within a larger research agenda aimed at examining the

schooling experiences of military-connected students. De Pedro and colleagues (2011) provide a

rationale for future studies aimed at examining the schooling experiences of military-connected

students. De Pedro and colleagues (2011) found that past research has focused solely on the

external risk issues (i.e. deployment) and resulting mental health outcomes of military children.

 

44

The authors call for future studies to focus on the impact of a supportive school climate as well

as peer, teacher, and principal awareness and support on the academic, social and emotional

outcomes of military children. This model builds on decades of research on the significant role of

a supportive, nurturing and responsive school environment in promoting positive outcomes for

high-risk student populations (i.e. students experiencing post-trauma issues in war zones,

students in high violence communities).

In summary, this study fills a gap in the military-connected school and military-

literatures. Specifically, future research on students in military-connected schools needs to

incorporate multivariate analyses. These analyses could examine relationships between multiple

components of school climate and key social and emotional outcomes known to impact the social

and academic functioning of secondary students, primarily mental health and school violence

victimization. Multivariate analyses can be conducted to determine whether school climate still

plays a significant role in the mental health outcomes and victimization rates of students who

have experienced the deployment of family members. Moreover, future multivariate analyses

could also assess the degree to which each component of school climate impacts the mental

health outcomes and victimization rates of both non-military and military student populations.

Future studies are also needed to assess cause and effect relationships between protective factors

in the school (i.e. school climate, peer support, etc.) and social and emotional outcomes known to

impact academic functioning. Overall, future research examining the impact of school climate on

the outcomes of military and non-military students in the same schools can potentially inform

school climate interventions.

 

45

Chapter Three:

The Role of School Climate in the Mental Health of Secondary Students: A Study of

Students in Military-Connected Schools

Introduction

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have played a detrimental role in the psychological,

social, and emotional development of the children of military service members. A retrospective

cohort study found that among military children with a deployed parent, the number of mental

and behavioral health visits increased by 11% during the 2005-2006 fiscal year (Gorman, Eide,

& Hisle-Gorman, 2010). In addition, behavioral disorders increased by 19% and stress disorders

increased by 18% (Gorman et al., 2010). Military life events such as parental separation,

household stress during reintegration, exposure to veteran war trauma, multiple school

transitions, and constantly re-adjusting family dynamics adversely affect the mental health of

military children (Chandra, Martin, Hawkins, & Richardson, 2010; Chartrand and Seigel, 2007;

Hoshmand & Hoshmand, 2007; Huebner, Mancini, Bowen, & Orthner, 2009; Jordan, Marmar,

Fairbank, Schlenger, Kulka, Hough, & Weiss, 1992; Rosenheck & Nathan, 1986; Solomon,

1988). Furthermore, research has found that when compared to children in civilian families,

military children have poorer mental health outcomes (Flake, Davis, Johnson, & Middleton,

2009; Galovski & Lyons, 2004).

Stress from the Deployment Cycle

A large body of literature has found that the bulk of military stressors stem from

experiencing the deployment of a family member, specifically a parent or sibling. Amen, Jellen,

Merves, and Lee (1988) have theorized that military families’ experience of deployment can be

divided into three phases—pre-deployment, deployment, and post-deployment. The pre-

 

46

deployment phase involves planning and preparing for and the eventual departure of a military

parent. The deployment phase includes the challenges associated with maintaining a household

with one parent gone, such as managing household finances and accessing social supports when

needed. The post-deployment phase includes the joy of a reunion with a returning parent and

facilitating the returning parent’s reintegration into society. Overwhelmingly, studies have found

that deployment-related stressors have led to an increase in depressive symptoms, high levels of

anxiety, and suicidal ideation among military children (Burrell, Adams, Durand, & Castro, 2006;

Doyle & Peterson, 2005; Levai, Kaplan, Ackermann, & Hammock, 1995; Reed, Bell, &

Edwards, 2011).

During the phases of the deployment context, military children experience tremendous

stress. Stress and anxiety stem from repeated and prolonged separation from a parent, fears and

anxieties about changes in family dynamics (Huebner, Mancini, Wilcox, Grass, & Grass, 2007),

and fear of parental injury and death (Cozza, Chun, & Pollo, 2005; Flake et al., 2009; Mmari,

Roche, Sudhinaraset, & Blum, 2009). Military children also experience the redistribution of

household roles and responsibilities (Faber, Willerton, Clymer, MacDermid, & Weiss, 2008;

Huebner et al., 2007). Often, when a parent is deployed, military children, especially adolescents,

take on household roles and responsibilities, previously assumed by parents and other adults. In a

qualitative study of adolescent youth coping during deployment, Mmari and colleagues (2009)

found that adolescents’ family roles were enhanced and they performed household duties

normally reserved for adults. Deployment-period responsibilities included increased household

work such as more chores and taking care of younger siblings. Even after a deployed parent is

reunited with his or her family, the experience of reintegration can be stressful. Studies have

found that reintegrated military families must deal with shifting household responsibilities and

 

47

roles, the stress of a veterans’ re-establishment of employment, and the veterans’ process of re-

establishing a relationship with the military child after months or even years of separation

(Burrell et al., 2006; Doyle & Peterson, 2005; Peebles-Kleiger and Kleiger, 1994).

The bulk of research on military children and mental health has focused exclusively on

children with a military parent. Research on the potential adverse impacts on mental health as a

result of having a sibling in the military is still in its nascent stages. A recent qualitative study

examined in detail that the deployment of a sibling creates psychological strain for a military

child. Rodriguez & Margolin (2011) found that a sense of loss and anxiety permeates the family

system, which, in turn, led to a families’ isolating themselves from support systems and

retreating from previously enjoyable activities. Military children are also aware of their parents’

pain, sadness and worry about the sibling’s safety. Similar to parental deployment, Rodriguez

and Margolin (2011) found that parents would become more protective of a left-behind sibling

with the goal of keeping them from being lonely or sad. However, positive outcomes were also

uncovered, specifically that a military sibling served as important role model of hard-work, self-

sacrifice, and discipline toward personal goals.

Like the existing research literature assessing the relationship between the outcomes of

military children and military-specific stressors, studies have also documented the negative

impact of external risk issues on the academic, social-emotional, and psychological outcomes of

students from historically oppressed demographic groups (by race, ethnicity, gender, SES, and

sexual orientation) (Finn & Rock, 1997; Gutman, Sameroff, & Eccles, 2002; Kagan, 1990). For

instance, research on low-SES, African-American and Latino students residing in high poverty

neighborhoods, has found that these students experience external risk issues such as

discrimination, community violence, household financial stress, war trauma, and high mobility

 

48

(Finn & Rock, 1997; Gutman et al., 2002; Kagan, 1990; Marachi, Astor, & Benbenishty, 2006).

These factors adversely impact long-term psychological and social outcomes, as well as

academic achievement (Anyon, 1997; Lynch & Cicchetti, 1997; Townsend, 2000).

The Role of School Climate

Studies conducted in various academic disciplines have indicated that a supportive school

climate can reduce students’ risky behavior outcomes (Eisenberg, Neumark-Sztainer, & Perry,

2003; Elliot, Gregory, & Fan, 2010; Hoy, Smith, & Sweetland, 2002; Hoy, Tarter, & Bliss,

1990). Recent reviews of school climate have concluded that there are multiple components of

school climate (Cohen, McCabe, Michelli, & Pickerall; 2009; Zullig, Koopman, Patton, &

Ubbes, 2010). These components include caring relationships with adults and peers, respect for

family issues, approval of risky behavior, sense of safety and order, meaningful participation,

and belonging. Caring relationships is defined by student’s perception of the extent of social and

emotional support they receive from teachers and other school adults, and respect for student’s

family is defined by a student’s perception that teachers and peers are aware of his or her family

issues and background. The dimension of risky behavior disapproval is defined as a student’s

view of risky behaviors among peers. These include substance use, bullying, weapons

possession, and other risky behaviors in the school context. Safety is defined as a student’s sense

of physical security and social-emotional security,is defined as a student’s perception of his or

her participation in school-wide and extracurricular activities. Belonging is defined as the degree

to which students feel they belong to a school community and have a positive connection with

peers and adults in a school community.

Supportive and nurturing school climates can potentially promote positive mental health

among students in different geographical and cultural contexts (Marachi, Astor, & Benbenishty,

 

49

2006; Pallas, 1988; Wang, 2009). Some studies have found that supportive relationships with

peers and teachers help students adjust behaviorally and emotionally in school contexts, persist

when encountering challenging social and academic situations, develop high self-esteem, and

seek help from adults (Bond et al., 2007; Wilson, 2004; Bonny, Britto, Klostermann, Hornung, &

Slap, 2000). In some cases, supportive relationships with teachers have contributed to lower

levels of anxiety, depression, and obsessive-compulsive personality disorder symptoms. In

schools where students have a strong sense of safety and order and understanding of school

violence policies and procedures, students exhibit less anxiety and depression symptoms

(Marachi, Astor, & Benbenishty, 2006; Wang, 2009). Not surprisingly, students who feel

socially and emotionally connected to a school community have reported fewer anxiety and

depressive symptoms and conduct problems (Bond et al., 2007; Loukas, Suzuki, & Horton,

2006).

In particular, a supportive school climate can curb the negative mental health outcomes of

psychologically strained minority populations. In the United States, for instance, two decades of

research conducted in high poverty urban schools have indicated that different elements of

school climate (i.e. supportive relationships with teachers and peers, connectedness to school

staff, an active role in creating school discipline policies and procedures, and awareness of

students’ family background and issues) significantly reduce mental health problems and

victimization rates among low SES African-American and Latino students (Ladson-Billings,

1994; Lynch & Cicchetti, 1997; McGuire, Anderson, Toomey, & Russell, 2010;).

Given research on other psychologically strained student populations, it would be

expected that a supportive school climate, where teachers and peers are aware of students’

unique family issues and background, would facilitate positive mental health outcomes among

 

50

military children. Recent studies have suggested that there are negative perceptions of school

climate (i.e. belonging, relationships, and school safety) among military students (Bradshaw,

Sudhinareset, Mmari, & Blum, 2010; Chandra et al., 2010; Mmari, Bradshaw, Sudhinaraset, &

Blum, 2010; Mmari, Roche, Sudhinaraset, & Blum, 2009). Chandra and colleagues (2010) found

that military children reported being bullying victims of anti-war student perpetrators, a sense of

alienation from civilian peers, and a feeling of being misunderstood by school staff members. In

addition, Mmari and colleauges (2010) found that due to multiple transitions, military students

had difficulty with making friends, adjusting to new physical school environments, addressing

learning gaps, and proactively seeking academic and emotional support from school staff and

peers.

While the preceding studies provide some indication of negative social and emotional

climate for military children in civilian schools, some investigations have uncovered attempts by

educators to provide supportive school environments for military children. A few studies have

identified the use of some “homegrown” strategies and practices, primarily aimed toward social

and school connectedness and supportive teacher-student relationships (Bradshaw et al., 2010;

Chandra et al., 2010). This included encouraging military students to participate in

extracurricular activities, connecting military students and families, increased communication

between schools and military families, professional development on military culture, and

assigning a school staff member to act as a supportive adult for military students (Bradshaw et

al., 2010; Chandra et al., 2010; Mmari et al., 2010; Mmari et al., 2009). However, none of these

studies have measured the impact of a supportive school climate on the mental health outcomes

of military children.

 

51

The preceding studies on military children in public schools have assisted us in exploring

their social and emotional experiences in civilian public schools. Future research needs to

systematically examine how they experience the social and emotional qualities of their school

environments and the potential impact of school climate on their mental health outcomes. In

addition, research so far has focused predominantly on the emotional and psychological

experiences of children whose parents are military-service members while paying little attention

to the experiences of children whose siblings serve in the military. Given the findings from

recent research on military siblings, future research would also to need expand the term military

children to include children with military siblings.

This study serves to address these gaps. In this study, I evaluate and compare the mental

health outcomes of military children (with a parent or sibling in the military) and non-military

children as well as examine relationships between school climate and mental health. Drawing

from existing research on the mental health of military children, it is expected that military

children have more adverse mental health outcomes than non-military children. There has also

been a wide breadth of research on school climate and mental health; it is expected that school

climate promotes positive mental health outcomes and curbs negative mental health outcomes

among military children. Moreover, considering research on the protective effects of school

climate on the mental health outcomes of psychologically strained student populations, it is also

expected that a supportive school climate would promote positive mental health outcomes even

if students have experienced military stressors such as a deployment.

Considering the gaps in school climate research and studies on military children and

mental health, multiple objectives guide this study. First, this study aims to compare mental

health outcomes, specifically the well-being, depression, and suicidal ideation rates of military

 

52

and non-military students in a normative sample of students in military-connected schools.

Second, this study evaluates associations between school climate and mental health among

students. Third, this study seeks to examine associations between school climate and mental

health, accounting for deployment. Last, this study seeks to compare the effects of school climate

on mental health within separate subsamples of military and non-military students.

Methods

Data Sources

The main source of data in this study is the 2011 California Healthy Kids survey

(CHKS). The data from the California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) is comprised of individual

level data where individuals are also identified by school, county, and local educational agency

(i.e. public school district). The CHKS is the largest statewide survey of resiliency, protective

factors, and risk behaviors in the United States and is collected from students at the elementary,

middle, and high school levels. The CHKS is comprised of several modules, including the core

module. The core module includes data on demographics (e.g. age, grade, gender, race and

ethnicity), health-related behaviors, tobacco use, drug use, violence behaviors, bullying,

victimization, and school climate (Austin, Bates & Duerr, 2011).

The CHKS also includes the military-connected module. In 2010, a research team at the

University of Southern California and West Ed collaborated to create the CHKS military-

connected module in response to a growing awareness among researchers and educators on the

social, emotional, psychological and academic needs of military children. Congress directed the

U.S. Department of Education (DoE) and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) to address these

gaps (U.S. Department of Defense, 2008). The military-connected module is administered to

parents, school staff, and students to gather their views of their schools and the educational,

 

53

developmental, and health-related needs of their students. The military-connected module

includes military demographic items as well as items on exposure to deployment, school

transitions, family dynamics, parent-school relationships, mental health, and positive well-being.

The student military-connected module is administered to both military and non-military

students in military-connected schools.

The present study utilizes data from both the core module and military-connected

modules collected in Spring 2011. The CHKS core module included 115 items in the middle

school version and 126 items in the high school version.

CHKS Data collection procedure. The CHKS core module and the military-connected

module were administered in the Spring of 2011 in eight military-connected school districts

serving elementary, middle, and high school students, surrounding military bases in the San

Diego metropolitan area. The participating schools were required to survey all students in grades

5,7, 9, and 11. Since the focus of this dissertation is on secondary students, data collected from

7th, 9th, and 11th graders will be analyzed. Prior to the survey administered at a secondary school

site, parental consent was gathered for each participating student. Surveys were also sealed in

envelopes for classrooms in schools. The envelopes reported the number of students absent in

these classes at the day of the survey. There were 599 envelopes. The surveys were administered

by school staff members or by USC team members. Proctoring instructions and trainings were

given to all survey administrators and an introductory script was read to the participating

students. The USC research team provided survey administrators with gift cards as incentives, in

order to facilitate high response rates. Participants were encouraged to answer questions honestly

and assured their responses would remain anonymous. Participants were allowed to withdraw

 

54

from the survey at any time. The core and military-connected modules took approximately 2

hours to complete.

The CHKS data used in this study is a subsample of 14,943 7th, 9th, and 11th graders. The

overall number of enrolled students eligible to participate in the survey was 18,701. Absent

students and students whose parents refused permission to participate in the study were excluded

from the study sample. The final response rate was 86.73%.

California Department of Education (CDE) Dataquest. The CHKS dataset used for

this dissertation was also merged with two school-level items from the 2010 Accountability

Progress data, Base API and proportion of school receiving free and reduced price meals. A Base

API can be used as a measure of a school’s academic achievement level. A base API score is

calculated from the following indicators: Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) test

indicators in core academic subjects (English language arts, math, science, and history-social

science), California Modified Assessment (CMA) test results, California Alternate Performance

Assessment (CAPA) results, and California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE) results

(California Department of Education, 2011). The API scores fall into a numeric index ranging

from 200 to 1000. After calculation of API, schools receive accountability information in API

reports.

Data related to the poverty level of students in a school is also provided, specifically the

proportion of students qualifying for free and reduced priced meals. The USDA determines

federal eligibility requirements for students to receive free and reduced price lunch (California

Department of Education, 2011). The USDA Department’s guidelines for free and reduced price

meals were obtained by multiplying the 2011 Federal Income poverty guidelines by 1.30 and

1.85 respectively, and by rounding the result upward to the next whole dollar. The data in this

 

55

dissertation includes percent of students who qualify for free and reduced priced meals by

school.

Measures

Dependent Variables

Well-being. As seen in Table 10, participants were asked about their well-being (α =

.894). Five items were used for this construct: In the last 30 days, how often did you feel full of

energy; happy; proud; good about life; excited; strong. The responses to these items were on a

five-point Likert scale and ranged from 1 = None of the time, 2= A little of the time, 3 = Some of

the time, 4 = Most of the time, 5 = All of the time. First, a well-being scale was created. The

composite score of each participant was derived by summing up the well-being items. Second,

well-being scale scores were divided by two at a cutpoint of 75% to create a variable with a

dichotomous outcome, where 1 = high well-being and 0 = low well-being. A cut off of the 75th

percentile was utilized to identify those with high levels of well-being.

Depression. As seen in Table 10, participants were asked questions related to depression

(α = .812). Five items were used for this construct: In the last 30 days, how often did you feel

like everything feels hard to do; nothing can cheer you up; restless, cannot stay still in one place;

nervous; do not have much hope. The responses to these items were on a five-point Likert scale

and ranged from 1 = None of the time, 2= A little of the time, 3 = Some of the time, 4 = Most of

the time, 5 = All of the time. First, a depression scale was created. The composite score of each

participant was derived by summing up the depression items. Second, depression scale scores

were divided by two at a cutpoint of 75% to create a variable with a dichotomous outcome,

where 1 = depression and 0 = no depression. A cut off of the 75th percentile was utilized to

identify those with high levels of depression.

 

56

Suicidal Ideation. As seen in Table 10, participants were asked about suicidal ideation in

the past year, “During the past 12 months, did you ever seriously consider suicide?” The

responses to this item were 1 = No and 2 = Yes.

Table 10. Domains, Scales and Items for the Mental Health Variable Items Depression “In the last 30 days, how often did you feel…

…like everything feels hard to do.” …like nothing can cheer you up.” ... restless, cannot stay still in one place.” …nervous.” …that you do not have much hope.” …like you are not important.” The possible responses to this item were A) None of the time; B) A little of the time; C) Some of the time; D) Most of the time; E) All of the time.

Well-Being “In the last 30 days, how often did you feel… …feel full of energy.” …happy.” ... proud.” …nervous.” …good about life.” …excited.” …strong.” The possible responses to this item were A) None of the time; B) A little of the time; C) Some of the time; D) Most of the time; E) All of the time.

Suicidal Ideation

“During the past 12 months, did you ever seriously consider suicide?” The possible responses to this item were A) No B) Yes

Independent Variables

School Climate Perceptions. According to the school climate literature, there are

multiple dimensions of school climate in the school context. As seen in Table 11, The CHKS

core module provides items covering multiple dimensions of school climate. These include sense

of safety, relationship with adults, belonging, and peer risky climate, meaningful participation,

and school’s respect for student’s family issues.

 

57

Safety. Two items asked respondents about their perceptions of safety in their schools (α

= .812). One item is “I feel safe in my school.” The responses to this item were on a five point

Likert scale and ranged from 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neither disagree or agree,

4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly agree. The second item is “How safe do you feel when you are at

school?” The responses to this item were 1 = Very safe, 2 = Safe, 3 = Neither safe nor unsafe, 4

= Unsafe, 5 = Very unsafe. The item responses were not congruent. The second item was

recoded as 1 = Very Unsafe, 2 = Unsafe, 3 = Neither safe nor unsafe, 4 = Safe, 5= Very Safe.

The composite score of each participant was derived by summing up the two items and dividing

by two. Therefore, the safety scale scores range from 1-5.

Relationship with Adults. In this scale, participants were asked about their relationships

with adults in the school (α = .880). Six items were used for this construct: At my school, there is

a teacher or some other adult who tells me I do a good job; who tells me when I do good; who

notices when I’m not there; who always wants me to do my best; who listens to me when I have

something to say; who believes I will be a success. The responses to these items were on a four-

point Likert scale and ranged from 1 = Not at all true, 2= A little true, 3 = Pretty much true, 4 =

Very much true. The composite score of each participant was derived by summing up the six

items and dividing by six. Therefore, the relationships scale scores range from 1-4.

Belonging. In this scale, participants were asked about their sense of belonging (α =

.797). Three items were used for this construct: Strongly agree or disagree with, I feel close to

people at this school; I am happy to be at this school; I feel like I am part of this school The

possible responses to these items were on a five-point Likert scale and ranged from 1 = Strongly

disagree, 2= Disagree, 3 = Neither disagree or agree, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly agree. The

 

58

composite score of each participant was derived by summing up the three items and dividing by

three. Therefore, the safety scale scores range from 1-5.

Risky Behavior Approval. In this scale, participants were asked about their perceptions of

risky behaviors (α = .900). Six items were used for this construct: How do you feel about

someone your own age smoking one or more packs of cigarettes a day; having one or more

drinks of alcohol every day; trying marijuana or hashish; using marijuana once a month or more,

carrying a weapon to school; how would your friends feel about you smoking one or more packs

of cigarettes a day? The possible responses to these items were on a three-point Likert scale and

ranged from 1 = Neither approve or disapprove, 2= Somewhat disapprove, 3 = Strongly

disapprove. The composite score of each participant was derived by summing up the six items

and dividing by six. Therefore, the safety scale scores range from 1-3.

Meaningful Participation. In this scale, participants were asked about their meaningful

participation at school (α = .742). Three items were used for this construct: I do interesting

activities at school; At school, I help decide things like class activities; I do things that make a

difference. The possible responses to these items were on a four-point Likert scale and ranged 1

= Not at all true, 2= A little true, 3 = Pretty much true, 4 = Very much true. The composite score

of each participant was derived by summing up the three items and dividing by 3. Therefore, the

safety scale scores range from 1-4.

Respect for Family. Two items asked participants to report their school’s respect for their

family life (α = .85). The first item was “Adults in this school respect my family.” The second

item asked participants to report school adult’s understanding for their family life. The item was

“Other students in school do not really understand my family life.” The possible responses to this

item were 1 = Not at all true, 2= A little true, 3 = Pretty much true, 4 = Very much true. The

 

59

items are not congruent. The second item was reverse coded. The composite score of each

participant was derived by summing up the two items and dividing by two. Therefore, the safety

scale scores range from 1-4.

Table 11. Domains, Scales and Items for the School Climate Variables Variable Items Belonging “Strongly agree or disagree with…

…I feel close to people at this school.” …I am happy to be at this school.” …I feel like I am part of this school.” The possible responses to these items were A) Strongly disagree; 2) Disagree; 3) Neither disagree or agree; 4) Agree; 5) Strongly agree.

Relationships with Adults

“At my school there is a teacher or some other adult who… …tells me I do a good job.” …tells me when I do good.” …who notices me when I’m not there.” …who always wants me to do my best.” …who notices when I’m not there.” …who always wants me to do my best.” …who listens to me when I have something to say.” …who believes I will be a success.” The possible responses to these items were A) Not at all true; 2) A little true; 3) Pretty much true; 4) Very much true;

Safety “I feel safe in my school.” The possible responses to this item were A) Strongly Disagree; 2) Disagree; 3) Neither disagree or agree; 4) Agree; 5) Strongly agree. “How safe do you feel when you are at school?” The possible responses to this item were A) Very safe; B) Safe; C) Neither safe nor unsafe; D) Unsafe; E) Very unsafe.

Meaningful Participation

“At school… …I do interesting things at school.” …I help decide things like class activities.” …I do things that make a difference.” The possible responses to this item were A) Not at all true; B) A little true; C) Pretty much true; D) Very much true; E) Don’t know.

(Table 11 continued)

 

60

(Table 11 continued) Approval of Risky Behaviors

“How do you feel about… …someone your own age smoking one or more packs of cigarettes a day.” …having one or more drinks of alcohol every day.” …trying marijuana or hashish.” …using marijuana once a month or more.” …carrying a weapon to school.” The possible responses to this item were A) Not at all true; B) A little true; C) Pretty much true; D) Very much true.

Respect for family

“Adults in this school respect my family.” “Other students in school do not really understand my family.” The possible responses to this item were A) Not at all true; B) A little true; C) Pretty much true; D) Very much true; E) Don’t know.

Deployment (Past Ten Years). As seen in Table 12, one item asked participants to report

their experiences with the deployment of a family member. The item was “About your family

and the military, as far as you can remember, how many times in the last 10 years did any

member of your family leave home and serve (deploy) outside the USA?” The possible

responses to this item were 1 = Never, 2 = Once, and 3 = Twice or more. Two dummy variables

were created: Deployment (1 time) and deployment (2 or more times).

Table 12. Deployment Item Variable Item Deployment “As far as you can remember, how many times in the past 10 years

did any member of your family leave home and serve (deploy) outside the USA?” The possible responses to this item were A) Never; B) Once; C) Twice or more; D) Don’t know.

Race and Ethnicity. As seen in Table 13, two items were used to determine the racial and

ethnic backgrounds of the participants. Participants were asked, “What is your race?” the

possible responses were 1 = American Indian or Alaska Native, 2 = Asian, 3= Black or African-

American, 5 = Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and 5 = White. Another item asked, “Are

 

61

you of Hispanic or Latino origin?” The possible responses were 1) Yes and 2) No. A variable

was computed for race and ethnicity and the categories were 1) Asian/AI/NH/PI 2) Black 3)

White 4) Mixed 5) Hispanic/Latino. Then, race and ethnicity was represented by White as the

reference and four dummy variables—Asian/AI/NH/PI, Black, Mixed, and Hispanic/Latino.

Grade level. One item was used to determine the grade of the participants. Participants

were asked, “What grade are you in? The possible responses were 1) 6th grade, 2) 7th grade, 3) 8th

grade, 4) 9th grade, 5) 10th grade, 6) 11th grade, 7) 12th grade, 8) Other grade. Grade level was

represented by a series of dummy variables: 7th grade, 9th grade, and 11th grade.

Gender. Participants were asked to report their gender. They were asked, “What is your

sex?” and the possible responses were 1 = male and 2 = female. The items were recoded as 0 =

female and 1 = male. Gender was represented by a dummy variable coded as 1= female and 0 =

male.

Military Connection. One item was used to determine a respondent’s military

connection. Participants were asked to report their connection to the military in one item. The

item asks participants, “Who in your family is in the military (Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force,

national Guard or Reserves)?” the possible responses were 1 = No one in my family is in the

military, 2 = Father, 3 = Mother, 4 = Brother or sister, and 5 = Grandparent or other relative.

Based on the literature, military connection is defined as having a parent or sibling serving in the

military (De Pedro et al., 2011; Rodriguez & Margolin, 2011). Thus, the variable was recoded

with the following categories: 0) Not in the military 2) Having a military parent and 3) Having a

military sibling. Military connection was represented by two dummy variables: Having a military

parent and having a military sibling.

 

62

Table 13. Domains, Scales and Items for the Demographic Variables Variable Items Gender “What is your sex?”

Respondents chose one of the following: A) Male and B) Female. Grade “What grade are you in?”

Respondents chose one of the following: A) 6th grade; B) 7th grade; C) 8th grade; D) 9th grade; E) 10th grade; F) 11th grade; G) 12th grade; H) Other grade; I) Ungraded

Race and Ethnicity

“What is your race?” Possible responses included A) American Indian or Alaska Native; B) Asian; C) Black or African American; D) Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander; E) White; F) Mixed (two or more) races. “Are you of Hispanic or Latino origin?” Respondents chose one of the following: A) No; B) Yes

Military Connection

“Who in your family is in the military (Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, National Guard, or Reserves)? Respondents could mark more than one of the following answers: A) No one in my family is in the military; B) Father; C) Mother; D) Brother or sister; E) Grandparent or other relative; F) Don’t know

School Level Variables

Taken from publically available CDE data, two school-level variables were also used to

represent two school contextual factors surrounding school climate effects on mental health and

victimization—academic performance index (API) and free and reduced price lunch. A third

school-level variable, military concentration, was generated from student level data from the

CHKS military-connected module.

Academic Performance Index (API). To obtain a school’s base API score, the

following indicators are calculated: Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) test indicators

in core academic subjects (English language arts, math, science, and history-social science),

California Modified Assessment (CMA) test results, California Alternate Performance

Assessment (CAPA) results, and California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE) results.

The API scores fall into a numeric index ranging from 200 to 1000.

 

63

Free and Reduced Price Meals. The California Department of Education also publishes

the percentage of students who qualify for free and reduced price meals in each school. The

USDA determines federal eligibility requirements for students to receive free and reduced price

lunch. The USDA Department’s guidelines for free and reduced price meals were obtained by

multiplying the 2011 Federal Income poverty guidelines by 1.30 and 1.85 respectively, and by

rounding the result upward to the next whole dollar.

Military Concentration. The military-connected module in the CHKS includes an item

that asks participants the following: “Who in your family is in the military (Army, Navy,

Marines, Air Force, National Guard, or Reserves?” The possible responses are A) No one in my

family is in the military, B) Father, C) Mother, D) Brother or sister; E) Grandparent or other

relative; F) Don’t know. The item was recoded as 1 - Having a parent in the military and 0 - No

parent in the military. A variable aggregated at the school level was created. This aggregate

variable represents the proportion of students with a military parent in a school.

Analytical Plan

The aim of this study was to examine associations between school climate and mental

health among students in military-connected schools. The data was analyzed using bivariate and

multivariate analyses. Bivariate analyses were conducted to outline the characteristics of the

sample by gender, grade level, race and ethnicity, and military connection. Bivariate analyses

were then performed to analyze mental health outcomes among non-military students, students

with a military parent and students with a military sibling. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests

of the well-being and depression scales by military-connection compared the overall well-being

and depression rates of the three groups. Cross-tabulations were then generated to compare the

three groups by each well-being, depression, and suicidal ideation item. Chi-square analyses

 

64

were conducted to determine significant associations between military-connection and each

mental health item.

Multivariate analyses using logistic regression were then conducted. The logistic

regression technique is used when the dependent variable is limited or constrained to a

dichotomous outcome. The dependent variables in this study were nominal and dichotomous and

coded as 0 or 1. A direct method procedure was used to assess the predictive value of

independent variables of interest, while controlling for other independent variables. In addition,

logistic regression is an appropriate statistical technique for examining differences in outcomes

by demographic group.

In this study, logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine associations

between school climate and mental health. Separate logistic regression analyses were conducted

to assess relationships between school climate and mental health within each group of students

by military-connection—non-military students, students with a military parent, and students with

a military sibling. Logistic regression analyses were also conducted to assess relationships

between school climate and mental health, controlling for deployment.

Prior to conducting the logistic regression analyses, several decisions were made to

evaluate the logistic regression models. First, statistical significance tests were set at p < .05.

Second, it was determined that the strength of each independent variable would be measured by

the odds ratios and confidence intervals of each predictor. Odds ratios and confidence intervals,

instead of individual regression coefficients, provide the researcher easier interpretation of

results and are generally used in studies with large samples. Third, a series of indicators, the

likelihood ratio test, Cox & Snell R2, Nagelkerke R2, were used to determine if each logistic

model was a model fit. A logistic model is said to provide a better fit to the data if it

 

65

demonstrates an improvement over the intercept model, which contains no predictors. Fourth,

goodness-of-fit statistics were used to assess the fit of a logistic model against observed

outcomes. The inferential goodness-of-fit statistic used in this study is the Hosmer-Lemeshow

(H-L) test. The H-L statistic is a Pearson chi-square statistic calculated from a 2 x g table of

observed and estimated expected frequencies, where g is the number of groups formed from the

estimated probabilities. A non-significant H-L statistic indicates that there is no significant

difference between the observed frequencies and the expected frequencies derived from the

model, and hence, the model fits the data well. Fifth, the percent correct prediction statistic was

evaluated to determine the percent of all cases correctly predicted in each logistic regression

model. This statistic is an indicator of predictive power of each logistic regression model. . In

this study, overall percent correct prediction statistics for all logistic regression models ranged

from 75% to 95%. Also, the number of cases observed to be 0 that were correctly predicted to be

0 ranged from 682 to 9543. The number of cases observed to be 1 that were correctly predicted

to be 1 ranged from 88 to 1551.

Sixth, listwise case deletion was used for the logistic regression models. Last, additional

analyses were also conducted to account for school-level factors, and statistical interactions

incorporating school-level factors and military connection were also conducted; however, no

significant statistical interactions. SPSS 19 was utilized in all univariate, bivariate, and

regression analyses.

Two other multivariate statistical techniques were originally considered for this study.

First, a multivariate linear regression (MLR) approach was considered. MLR was deemed

inappropriate since results would not be meaningful for students at clinical levels of depression,

high levels of well-being, and high levels of suicidal ideation. MLR was also deemed

 

66

inappropriate since linear regression analyses assume that dependent variables are interval level

and continuous1. Second, a two-level hierarchical linear model (HLM) was prepared to assess the

effects of school-level and individual-level variables on mental health; however, preliminary

analyses indicated an intra-class correlation coefficient of .038. Due to the lack of practical

significance for explaining 3.8% of between school variation, logistic regression analyses were

conducted to address the study’s research questions.

Results

Descriptive Statistics of the Sample

In the first step of analysis, descriptive statistics were conducted to determine the

demographic characteristics of the overall sample and demographic differences between military

and non-military students. Table 14 shows that the sample is almost evenly split by male and

female and by grade level (7th, 9th, and 11th grades). The results indicate a diverse sample of

students by race and ethnicity. Almost three-fourths of the sample (72.7%) is non-white.

Hispanic students comprise the largest racial/ethnic group in the sample (50.3%), while Black

students comprise the smallest proportion of students (3.0%). Table 14 also shows that military-

connected students comprised almost 15% of the sample. About 4.2% of the sample is comprised

of students with a military sibling, while 8.8% of the students have a parent in the military.

86.9% of the sample is classified as non-military.

Bivariate analyses were also conducted within three subsamples—non-military students,

students with a parent serving in the military, and students with siblings serving in the military.

When compared to the proportions of students by race and ethnicity in the non-military sample,

                                                                                                               1 Multivariate linear regression model were conducted to determine relationships between school climate and mental health. An aim of this study was to assess differences in mental health outcomes among demographic groups. Hence, odds ratios from logistic regression models provided more meaningful interpretations.

 

67

Table 14 indicates that among students with a military parent, Asian, Black, and Mixed students

represent a larger proportion of total students (12.1%, 7.2%, and 18.1%, respectively), while

Hispanic students represent a smaller proportion (36.9%). Among students with a sibling, white

students are slightly overrepresented (31.7%). When compared to the proportions of students by

grade in the non-military group, Table 5 indicates that among students with a military parent,

students are slightly younger overall. 40.6% of students with a military parent are 7th graders,

while 25.8% are 11th graders. In contrast, the results suggest that students with siblings serving in

the military are a slightly younger group when compared to non-military students and students

with military parents. Table 14 shows that 25.6% of students with military siblings are 7th

graders, while 37.5% are in the 11th grade.

Table 14. Sample Characteristics for Study #2 (n= 14,943) Total

N(%) No one in the

military (N=12,990)

%

Parent (N=1396)

%

Sibling (N=649)

%

Gender Female Male

7606 (51.7%) 7181 (48.6%)

51.5 48.5

51.1 48.9

50.9 49.1

Grade 7th 9th 11th

4588 (32.9%) 4908 (35.2%) 4446 (31.9%)

32.3 35.4 32.3

40.6 33.6 25.8

25.6 33.9 37.5

Race/Ethnicity Asian/AI/HI/AN Black White Mixed Race Hispanic

1189 (8.2%) 432 (3.0%) 3948 (27.3%) 1606 (11.1%) 7261 (50.3%)

7.9 2.5 27.3 10.3 52.0

12.1 7.2 25.6 18.1 36.9

7.1 4.0 31.7 12.3 44.8

 

68

Military Connection and Mental Health

The next series of analyses consisted of detailed bivariate analyses. These analyses were

conducted to compare well-being, depression, and suicidal ideation rates among non-military

students, students with a military parent, and students with a military sibling. Overall, the results

show that students with a military sibling reported slightly higher rates of depression and suicidal

ideation than non-military students and students with a military parent. Also, non-military

students have slightly higher rates of well-being than students’ with military parents and students

with military siblings. In general, results from the bivariate analyses suggest the current war

context may affect the mental health outcomes of students with a military sibling to a greater

extent than students with a military parent and non-military students. However, discrepancies in

mental health outcomes among the three groups are unexpectedly small, given the unique

stressors of the present war context.

Overall Well-being and Depression by Military-Connection. Table 15 shows the first

set of bivariate analyses were conducted to compare the overall well-being and depression scores

of the three groups of students. ANOVA results indicate significant mean differences in overall

well-being among the three groups of students are significant, F (1, 11496) = 3.77, p=.01.

Students with a military sibling had slightly lower composite well-being scores than students

with a military parent and non-military students. The average well-being score for non-military

students is 21.02 (SD=5.74). The well-being scores for students with a military parent and non-

military students are slightly lower (M= 20.45, SD= 5.97 and M=20.76, SD=5.76, respectively).

ANOVA results indicate that there are significant mean differences in overall depression among

the three groups of students F (1, 11496) =3.13, p=.04). Students with a military sibling reported

slightly higher composite depression scores than students with a military parent and non-military

 

69

students. The average depression score for students with a military sibling is 14.26 (SD=5.30),

while the depression score for students with a military parent and non-military students are

slightly lower (M= 13.96, SD= 5.50 and M=13.53, SD=5.16, respectively).

Table 15. Means and Standard Deviations of Mental Health Scales Total

Non

Military Parent

Sibling

Well-Being* Depression*

20.95 (5.77) 13.60 (5.21)

21.02 (5.74) 13.53 (5.16)

20.45 (5.97) 13.96 (5.50)

20.76 (5.76) 14.26 (5.30)

*Significant for differences by military-connected status, p < .05

Composite depression and well-being scores were then dichotomized to compare the

rates of military and non-military students who have a high level of depression and have high

well-being. Table 16 indicates no significant differences among the three groups in terms of

well-being (X2=.052, df=2, p=.97). However, significant differences among the three groups

were detected in depression rates (X2=9.85, df=2, p<.05). About 7.9% of students with a military

parent reported high levels of depression, slightly higher than students with a military sibling

(6.9%) and non-military students (5.7%).

Table 16. Depression, Well-Being, and Suicidal Ideation by Military Connection (n=14,943) Total

Non Military (n= 12,990)

Military Parent (n= 1,318)

Military Sibling

(n= 635) Well-Being

High Low

Depression* High Low

Suicidal Ideation** Yes No

1318 (10.7%)

12,265 (89.3%)

681 (5.7%) 10,818 (94.1%)

1,947 (20.5%) 7,573 (79.5%)

1,133 (10.7%) 9,417 (89.3%)

559 (5.7%)

9,329 (94.3%)

1,622 (19.6%) 6,671 (80.4%)

125 (10.7%)

1,046 (89.3%)

86 (7.9%) 1001 (92.1%)

204 (26.1%) 578 (73.9%)

60 (11.0%) 484 (89.0%)

36 (6.9%)

488 (93.1%)

121 (27.2%) 324 (72.8%)

*Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p < .05 **Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p <.001

 

70

Well-being (Past 30 days). More detailed bivariate analyses were conducted to compare

rates of well-being among the three groups of students specifically drawing comparisons within

each well-being item (see Table 17). Chi-square tests of associations were conducted to assess

significant association between military-connection and each of the six well-being items. Table

17 shows that there were significant differences among the three groups of students within five

of the six well-being indicators. Significant associations were detected between military-

connection and feeling happy (X2= 41.549, df=8, p<0.05), feeling proud (X2= 16.158, df=8,

p<0.05), feeling good about life (X2= 23.968, df=8, p<0.05), feeling excited (X2= 15.649, df=8,

p<0.05), and feeling strong (X2= 16.481, df=8, p<0.05).

Table 17 indicates that non-military students have slightly higher rates of well-being than

students with a military parent and students with a military sibling. About 63.7% of non-military

students reported feeling happy most or all of the time, which is slightly higher than students

with a military sibling (58.6%) and students with a military parent (56.8%). A slightly higher

proportion of non-military students reported feeling proud most or all of the time (44.9%), when

compared to students with a military sibling (44.9%) and students with a military parent (43.0%).

Non-military students also had slightly higher rates of feeling good about life most or all of the

time (57.3%), than students with a military sibling (55.8%) and students with a military parent

(53.1%). Slightly higher rates of feeling excited and feeling strong most or all of the time were

found among non-military students (44.5%, 51.1%, respectively) than rates among students with

a military sibling (41.5%, 48.7%, respectively) and students with a military parent (43.8%,

50.9%, respectively).

 

71

Table 17. Well-Being by Military Connection Status (n=14,943) Total

Non

Military (N=12,990)

Military Parent

(N=1,318)

Military Sibling

(N=635) Feel full of energy None of the time A little of the time Some of the time Most of the time All of the time

6.3 12.7 29.2 34.4 17.3

6.3 12.4 29.4 34.5 17.4

7.3 14.7 28.0 34.4 15.5

5.2 14.3 29.2 32.0 19.3

Feel happy** None of the time A little of the time Some of the time Most of the time All of the time

4.3 10.2 22.7 42.0 20.8

4.2 9.7 22.4 42.7 21.0

5.9 12.9 24.4 38.7 18.1

3.8 12.8 24.8 36.5 22.1

Feel proud* None of the time A little of the time Some of the time Most of the time All of the time

9.2 15.4 29.4 28.6 17.4

9.0 15.2 29.4 29.2 17.2

10.1 16.8 30.2 25.2 17.8

10.0 16.1 29.1 24.9 20.0

Feel good about life** None of the time A little of the time Some of the time Most of the time All of the time

7.4 13.3 22.5 32.5 24.4

7.0 13.2 22.5 32.7 24.6

10.4 14.3 22.2 30.0 23.1

7.7 12.8 23.7 32.6 23.2

Feel excited* None of the time A little of the time Some of the time Most of the time All of the time

7.6 15.3 32.9 28.1 16.0

7.4 15.1 33.0 28.4 16.1

9.8 16.9 31.9 26.9 14.5

7.7 15.5 32.9 26.2 17.6

Feel strong* None of the time A little of the time Some of the time Most of the time All of the time

9.0 14.1 26.1 28.9 21.9

8.9 13.7 26.3 29.3 21.8

10.2 16.3 24.7 27.5 21.2

9.1 15.5 24.5 25.9 25.0

*Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p < .05 **Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p <.001

 

72

Depression (Past 30 days). Table 18 shows that more detailed analyses were also

conducted to compare the depression rates of the three groups of students, specifically examining

each group’s rates within each depression item. Results from this set of analyses suggest that

students with a military sibling had slightly higher rates than students with a military parent and

non-military student within each depression indicator.

Chi-square tests of association were conducted to determine if there were significant

associations between military-connection and each of the six depression indicators. The results

indicate that there are significant associations between military-connection and four of the six

depression indicators, including feeling like everything is hard to do (X2= 21.521, df=8, p<0.05),

feeling like nothing makes you happy (X2= 37.687, df=8, p<0.05), feeling restless, cannot stay in

one place (X2= 21.115, df=8, p<0.05), and feeling like you are not important (X2= 24.624, df=8,

p<0.05). About 21.6% of students with a military sibling reported feeling like everything is hard

to do most or all of the time, slightly higher than students with a military parent (19.0%) and

non-military students (16.8%). In addition, 17.3% of students with a military sibling reported

feeling like nothing makes you happy most or all of the time, higher than students with a military

parent (16.4%) and non-military students (12.5%). A higher percentage of students with a

military sibling (30.2%) reported feeling restless than students with a military parent (28.8%)

and non-military students (25.8%). In addition, 21.2% of students with a military sibling reported

most or all of the time feeling like you are not important, higher than students with a military

parent (18.5%) and non-military students (16.2%).

 

73

Table 18. Depression by Military-Connection Status (n=14,493) Total

Non

Military (N=12,990)

Military Parent

(N=1,318)

Military Sibling

(N=635) Feel like everything is hard to do* None of the time A little of the time Some of the time Most of the time All of the time

20.6 37.3 24.8 11.0 6.2

20.5 37.9 24.9 10.9 5.9

21.5 35.6 23.9 11.6 7.4

21.1 31.2 26.1 13.4 8.2

Feel like nothing makes you happy** None of the time A little of the time Some of the time Most of the time All of the time

47.2 24.4 15.2 8.2 4.9

48.2 24.2 15.1 7.8 4.7

42.4 25.5 15.7 10.7 5.7

40.9 25.9 15.8 10.6 6.7

Feel restless, cannot stay in one place* None of the time A little of the time Some of the time Most of the time All of the time

24.6 24.8 24.3 15.5 10.8

24.9 25.2 24.2 15.3 10.5

23.3 23.6 24.3 16.7 12.1

21.7 20.7 27.3 16.2 14.0

Feel nervous None of the time A little of the time Some of the time Most of the time All of the time

19.7 36.6 27.5 10.8 5.4

19.8 36.6 27.7 10.7 5.2

19.7 36.3 26.0 11.5 6.5

18.6 36.6 26.7 11.1 7.0

Feel you do not have much hope None of the time A little of the time Some of the time Most of the time All of the time

49.1 21.8 15.4 8.3 5.4

49.4 21.8 15.2 8.2 5.3

47.6 22.4 15.7 8.8 5.6

45.8 20.4 17.7 9.0 7.1

Feel like you are not important* None of the time A little of the time Some of the time Most of the time All of the time

44.3 22.9 16.1 9.6 7.1

45.0 22.9 15.9 9.4 6.8

40.5 24.0 17.0 10.0 8.5

39.8 21.1 18.0 12.1 9.1

*Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p < .05 **Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p <.001

 

74

Suicidal Ideation (Past Year). A bivariate analysis was then conducted to compare the

rates of suicidal ideation of each group of students (see Table 16). A significant bivariate

association was found between military-connection and suicidal ideation (X2= 31.753, df=8,

p=.000). Students with a military sibling (27.6%) reported higher rates of suicidal ideation than

students with a military parent (26.2%) and non-military students (19.6%).

In general, the small differences in mental health outcomes among the three groups stand

in stark contrast to recent studies comparing the mental health outcomes of military-connected

and non-military youth. Results from these studies found larger differences in depression and

anxiety between non-military and military-connected youth. In addition, students with a military

sibling had the most adverse mental health outcomes. This finding expands on recent findings

from a qualitative study on the psychological and emotional challenges that siblings of military

service members experience in the household context.

School Climate and Mental Health

Correlational Analyses. As seen in Table 19, analyses were conducted to examine the

relationship between multiple components of school climate and mental health. Bivariate

analyses were first conducted to determine relationships between multiple components of school

climate and mental health (i.e. well-being, depression, suicidal ideation). As expected, results

from the correlational analyses indicate significant relationships between school climate and

mental health. However, correlations between multiple components of school climate and mental

health were smaller in magnitude than expected.

In the realm of belonging, the results suggest that belonging and caring relationships are

associated with higher levels of well-being and lower levels of depression and suicidal ideation.

As seen in Table 19, there is a significant and moderate negative correlation between belonging

 

75

and depression (r= -.21) and between belonging and suicidal ideation (r=-.17). As expected, there

is a significant positive correlation between belonging and well-being (r=.30). Table 19 also

shows significant negative correlations between caring relationships and two negative mental

health indicators, depression (r=-.17) and suicidal ideation (r=-.13). As expected, there is a

significant positive correlation between caring relationships and well-being (r=.30).

In the case of meaningful participation, the results show that higher levels of meaningful

participation are associated with lower levels of depression and suicidal ideation and a higher

degree of well-being. Table 19 indicates significant negative correlations between meaningful

participation and depression (r=-.11) and suicidal ideation (r=-.10). A significant moderate

positive correlation was found between meaningful participation and well-being (r=.28).

Also, as expected, the results show that more risky behavior disapproval is associated

with lower levels of depression and suicidal ideation as well as a higher degree of well-being. A

significant negative relationship between risky behavior disapproval and depression (r=-.16) was

found, while a significant positive relationship between risky behavior disapproval and well-

being was detected (r=.17). Table 19 shows significant associations between lack of family

respect and each mental health category. Significant positive associations were detected between

lack of respect for family and depression (r=.14) and suicidal ideation (r=.03). Surprisingly, no

significant correlations were found between safety and each of the mental health variables.

Results from the correlation analyses suggest that a supportive school climate can

potentially facilitate positive mental health outcomes among students. However, contrary to

expectations, the results indicate that safety does not play a significant role in mental health. In

addition, the smaller than expected correlation coefficients between school climate and mental

 

76

health contradict decades of theoretical work outlining the significance of school climate in the

emotional and psychological well-being of adolescents.

Table 19. Correlational Analyses for Study #2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. Belonging -- .41**

.24** .36** .07** .22** -.03** -.21** .30** -.17**

2. Relationships .41** -- .08** .43** .19** .26** -.02* -.17** .29** -.13**

3. Safety .24** .08** -- .01 .03** .08** .00 .00 -.01 .01

4. Meaningful Participation

.36** .43** .01 -- .14** .19** .02 -.11** .28** -.10**

5. Respect for Family

.07** .19** .03** .14** -- .13** .04** .14** .10** .03*

6. Risky Behavior

.22** .26** .08** .19** .13** -- .01 -.16** .17** -.11

7. Deployment -.03** -.02* -.01 .02 .04** .01 -- .08** -.01 .07**

8. Depression -21** .17** .00 -.11** .14** -.16** .08** -- -.19** .31** 9. Well-Being .30** .29** 0.01 .28** .10** .17** -.01 -.19** -- -.29** 10 Suicidal Ideation

-.17** -.13** .01 -.10** .03* -.11** .07** .31** -.29** --

*p < .05 **p <.001

Multivariate Analyses. As seen in Tables 20-24, multivariate analyses were conducted

to further evaluate relationships between school climate and mental health, while accounting for

other covariates present in a military-connected school such as student demographics (gender,

grade level, race and ethnicity, and military connection) and the experience of deployment.

Table 20 shows results for the logistic regression model of well-being, depression, and

suicidal ideation by school climate. Overall, the results indicate that supportive school climates

are associated with an increased probability of well-being and a reduced likelihood of depression

and suicidal ideation. However, similar to results in the correlational analyses, the magnitude of

odds ratios in the following logistic regression is smaller than expected.

 

77

As seen in Table 20, belonging and caring relationships significantly predicted all three

mental health outcomes. A higher degree of belonging is significantly associated with an

increased likelihood of well-being (OR = 1.26; 95% CI = 1.15 – 1.37), a decreased likelihood of

depression (OR = .70; 95% = .63-.77), and a decreased likelihood of having suicidal ideation

(OR = .71; 95% CI = .66-.76). A higher degree of caring relationships with teachers and adults at

school is significantly associated with well-being (OR = 1.25; 95% CI  = 1.12 – 1.40), a

decreased likelihood of negative mental health (OR = .76; 95% CI = .67 - .85) and a decreased

likelihood of suicidal ideation (OR = .79; 95% CI = .72-.86).

As seen in Table 20, the results also show that risky behavior disapproval significantly

predicts both depression and suicidal ideation. An increasing level of risky behavior disapproval

is associated with a 43% decreased odds of having depression (OR = .57; 95% CI = .50 - .65)

and a 31% decreased odds of suicidal ideation (OR = .69; 95% CI = .63-.76). The results also

suggest that lack of respect for family is related to higher rates of depression and suicidal

ideation. The results indicate that a low degree of respect for family is associated with 50%

increased odds of depression (OR = 1.50; 95% CI – 1.36-1.66) and a 21% increased likelihood of

suicidal ideation (OR = 1.21; 95% CI = 1.13-1.29).

Meaningful participation predicted both well-being and depression. Unexpectedly, lack

of meaningful participation is associated with a 55% increased likelihood of well-being

(OR=1.55; 95% CI=1.42-1.69) and a 15% increased odds of depression (OR=1.15: 95%

CI=1.02-1.30). In the case of safety, the results show that there are associations between safety

and mental health, though small in magnitude. A lower degree of safety is associated with a

slightly decreased likelihood of well-being (OR = .84; 95% CI = .78- .90) and only a 9%

increased odds of having suicidal ideation (OR = 1.09; 95% = 1.03-1.16). In addition, Table 20

 

78

shows that disapproval of risky behaviors significantly predicted depression and suicidal

ideation. A higher degree of disapproval of risky behaviors is significantly associated with a 43%

decreased likelihood of depression (OR = .57; 95% CI=.50-.65) and a 31% decreased odds of

suicidal ideation (OR = .69; 95% CI= .63-.76).

Table 20 also shows associations between demographic variables and mental health. No

significant associations between military connection and well-being were found. In the case of

negative mental health outcomes, when compared to non-military students, having a military

parent is associated with an increased likelihood of depression (OR = 1.34; 95% CI =1.02-1.75)

and having suicidal ideation (OR = 1.31; 95% = 1.08-1.59). Also, having a military sibling is

associated with an increased likelihood of having suicidal ideation (OR = 1.50; 95% CI = 1.18 –

1.91). In the case of race and ethnicity, the most concerning finding involved analyses on Asian

students and mental health. The results suggest that Asian students have higher rates of

depression in comparison to White students. When compared to being white, being Asian is

associated with a decreased likelihood of well-being (OR = .72; 95% CI = .54-.96) and increased

likelihood of depression (OR = 1.43; CI = 1.05 - 1.95) and having suicidal ideation (OR = 1.26;

CI = 1.02-1.56). Also, while the odds ratios are not significant, Black students are more likely

than white students to have well-being (OR=1.46; 95% CI=.99-2.14) and are also more likely to

have depression than white students (OR=1.33; 95% CI=.82-2.19). Gender differences indicate

that male students have better mental health outcomes than female students. Male students are

almost twice as likely to have well-being (OR = 1.95; 95% CI = 1.70 - 2.23) than female

students.

 

79

Table 20. Logistic Regressions of Mental Health by Demographic and School Climate Variables among all students (n=14,943) Predictors Well-Being

OR (95% CI) Depression

OR (95% CI) Suicidal Ideation

OR (95% CI) Constant Grade

.04**

.82** (.78-.85) .37** .95 (.90-1.01)

3.36** .90** (.85-.95)

Gender Female (reference) Male

1.00 1.94** (1.69-2.22)

1.00 1.03 (.86-1.24)

1.00 .57** (.51-.64)

Race/Ethnicity White (reference) Asian/AI/AN/PI/HI Black Mixed Hispanic

1.00 .72* (.54-.96) 1.46 (.99-2.14) 1.05 (.83-1.32) 1.19* (1.02-1.39)

1.00 1.43* (1.05-1.95) 1.33 (.82-2.19) 1.28 (.95-1.72) .99 (.79-1.23)

1.00 1.26* (1.02-1.56) 1.02 (.72-1.44) 1.28* (1.05-1.56) .90 (.79-1.04)

Military-Connection None (reference) Parent Sibling

1.00 1.02 (.81-1.28) 1.13 (.83-1.55)

1.00 1.34* (1.02-1.75) 1.28 (.88-1.88)

1.00 1.31* (1.08-1.59) 1.50** (1.18-1.91)

School Climate Belonging Relationships Safety Meaningful Part. Respect for Family Risky Behavior

1.26** (1.15-1.37) 1.25** (1.12-1.40) .84** (.78-.90) 1.55** (1.42-1.69) 1.01 (.93-1.09) .96 (.86-1.07)

.70** (.63-.77) .76** (.67-.85) 1.03 (.95-1.12) 1.15* (1.02-1.30) 1.50**(1.36-1.66) .57**(.50-.65)

.71** (.66-.76) .79** (.72-.86) 1.09* (1.03-1.16) .95 (.88-1.02) 1.21** (1.13-1.29) .69** (.63-.76)

Model Evaluation % Correctly Predicted -2 Log Likelihood Cox & Snell R2

Nagelkerke R2

Block X2 (df) Model X2 (df) Goodness of fit Homer/Lemeshow

90.2% 6268.78 .05 .10 488.22 (14) 488.22 (14) 8.35

94.5% 3961.58 .03 .08 271.03 (14) 271.03 (14) 5.5

79.3% 7458.60 .06 .10 486.46 (14) 486.46 (14) 12.40

In general, the results show that school climate can influence the mental health outcomes

of students. In light of the breadth of theoretical literature advocating the protective effects of

school climate on mental health, odds ratios for school climate are smaller in magnitude than

 

80

expected. This unexpected finding suggests that other factors, in addition to school climate and

student demographics, could account for the mental health outcomes of students.

Deployment and Mental Health

Since this study takes place in the context of military-connected schools, it is expected

that military-related stressors, especially the deployment of a family member, may also impact

mental health outcomes. As seen in Table 21, the next step of analyses examined the role of

deployment and school climate in the mental health outcomes of students. Analyses were

conducted to determine the associations between deployments (single or multiple) and mental

health. Overall, deployment was a significant predictor of depression and suicidal ideation,

however, did not significantly predict well-being. Experiencing a multiple deployment is

associated with depression outcomes (OR =1.42; 95% CI = 1.27-1.59). Single and multiple

deployments were each associated with an increased likelihood of having suicidal ideation. In

comparison to the effect of single deployments, the results show that multiple deployments have

a greater effect on suicidal ideation (OR = 1.41; 95% CI = 1.20-1.65).

Despite the inclusion of deployment in the logistic regression model, multiple

components of school climate are still significantly associated with well-being, depression, and

suicidal ideation. As seen in Table 21, belonging and caring relationships continue to

significantly predict all three mental health outcomes, and the odds ratios are similar in

magnitude to the non-deployment logistic regression model seen in Table 21. A sense of

belonging is associated with an increase in likelihood of well-being (OR = 1.23; 95% CI = 1.12 -

1.36) and a decreased likelihood of depression outcomes (OR = .68; 95% CI = .61-.76) and

suicidal ideation (OR = .71; 95% CI = .66-.76). Also, caring relationships are associated with an

 

81

increased odds of having well-being (OR = 1.25; 95% CI = 1.11-1.41) and a decreased odds of

depression (OR = .75; 95% CI = .65-.86) and suicidal ideation (OR = .81; 95% CI = .73-.88).

In the deployment model (see Table 21), the effects of level of safety and meaningful

participation on mental health outcomes are similar in magnitude when compared to the non-

deployment model. Table 21 indicates that an unsafe school environment decreases the

likelihood of well-being (OR = .88; 95% CI = .81-.94) and slightly increases the likelihood of

suicidal ideation (OR=1.08; 95% CI=1.01-1.15). In addition, meaningful participation is

associated with an increased likelihood of well-being (OR = 1.60; 95% CI = 1.45-1.76) and

depression (OR= 1.15; 95% CI=1.02-1.31). Table 21 also indicates that respect for family and

risky behavior perceptions continue to be significant predictors of depression and suicidal

ideation, while the odds ratios are similar in magnitude when compared to those in the non-

deployment model. A lack of respect for family is associated with an increased likelihood of

depression (OR = 1.42; 95% CI = 1.27-1.59) and suicidal ideation (OR = 1.22; 95% CI = 1.14-

1.31). Also, a higher disapproval of risky behavior is associated with a decreased likelihood of

depression (OR = .59; 95% CI = .51-.69) and suicidal ideation (OR = .67; 95% CI = .61-.74).

Overall, deployment plays a significant role in depression and suicidal ideation among

students in military-connected schools. Moreover, as seen in Table 21, odds ratios for school

climate in these analyses were similar in magnitude to odds ratios seen in the non-deployment

model (see Table 20). This similarity suggests that school climate still plays a significant role in

promoting well-being and curbing rates depression and suicidal ideation, even though students

are experiencing single and multiple deployments of a family member.

 

82

Table 21. Logistic Regressions of Mental Health by Demographics, School Climate and Deployment (n=14,943) Predictors Well-Being

OR (95% CI) Depression

OR (95% CI) Suicidal Ideation

OR (95% CI) Constant Grade

.03**

.81** (.77-.85) .45* .94* (.88-.99)

3.29** .91* (.86-.97)

Gender Female (reference) Male

1.00 1.93** (1.67-2.23)

1.00 1.06 (.87-1.28)

1.00 .55**(.49-.63)

Race/Ethnicity White (reference) Asian/AI/AN/PI/HI Black Mixed Hispanic

1.00 .79 (.58-1.07) 1.65*(1.10-2.47) 1.11 (.87-1.42) 1.27* (1.07-1.51)

1.00 1.52* (1.09-2.12) 1.20 (.70-2.06) 1.18 (.87-1.63) .90 (.71-1.41)

1.00 1.26*(1.01-1.59) 1.08 (.75-1.56) 1.21 (.98-1.50) .90 (.78-1.04)

Deployments One Two or more

1.07 (.84-1.36) 1.14 (.94-1.37)

1.02 (.73-1.42) 1.37* (1.08-1.73)

1.33* (1.08-1.63) 1.41** (1.20-1.65)

School Climate Belonging Relationships Safety Meaningful Part. Respect for Family Risky Behavior

1.21** (1.10-1.33) 1.24**(1.10-1.40) .87** (.81-.94) 1.59** (1.44-1.75) .99 (.92-1.09) 1.02 (.90-1.15)

.68** (.61-.76) .76** (.66-.87) 1.04 (.95-1.14) 1.15* (1.02-1.31) 1.43** (1.28-1.59) .57** (.49-.67)

.71** (.66-.76) .82**(.75-.90) 1.08* (1.01-1.15) .92*(.84-.99) 1.21**(1.12-1.30) .68** (.61-.75)

Model Evaluation % Correctly Predicted -2 Log Likelihood Cox & Snell R2

Nagelkerke R2

Block X2 (df) Model X2 (df) Goodness of fit Homer/Lemeshow

90.3% 5375.93 .05 .10 422.87 (14) 422.87 (14) 14.12

94.8% 3340.55 .03 .08 230.33 (14) 230.33 (14) 3.04

79.4% 6442.86 .06 .10 439.38 (14) 439.38 (14) 15.15

`*Significant for differences by military-connected status, p < .05 **Significant for differences by military-connected status, p <.00 School Climate and Mental Health among Military and Non-Military Students

A large body of research suggests that school climate has uniquely strong effects on

student populations experiencing tremendous stress in social contexts outside of the school (e.g.

household, community). To test this assumption on military students, the next steps of analyses

 

83

examined relationships between school climate and mental health separately for military students

(students with a military parent and students with a military sibling) and non-military students.

Overall, the results show that the effects of school climate on mental health are similar among

military and non-military students.

Well-Being. Table 22 shows logistic regressions of well-being by school climate among

non-military and military students. An increasing level of belonging is associated with increased

likelihood of having well-being among non-military students (OR = 1.20; 95% CI= 1.08-1.33).

Similar to non-military students, belonging is associated with a 26% increased likelihood of

having well-being among military students (OR = 1.26; 95% CI = .99-1.61). As expected, among

non-military students, a higher degree of caring relationships is associated with a 24% increase

in having well-being (OR=1.24; 95% CI = 1.09-1.41). Although the results for caring

relationships present a non-significant result, the odds ratio for caring relationships among

military students is similar in magnitude to the odds ratio generated for non-military students

(OR=1.28; 95% CI .95-1.74). This result indicates that an increasing level of caring relationships

is associated with a 28% increased likelihood of having well-being among military students.

Table 22 also indicates that the effects of meaningful participation and safety on well-

being are similar in magnitude for non-military and military students. Among non-military

students, lack of safety is associated with a 11% decreased probability in having well-being (OR

= .89; 95% CI = .82-.97). Similarly, among military students, lack of safety is associated with a

21% decreased odds of having well-being (OR= .79; 95% CI = .65-.95). In the realm of

meaningful participation, the odds ratios for both non-military students and military students are

also similar in magnitude. Among non-military students, an increasing level of meaningful

participation is associated with a 62% increased probability of having well-being (OR = 1.62;

 

84

95% CI = 1.46-1.81). In the case of military students, increasing level of meaningful

participation is associated with a 38% increased odds of having well-being (OR = 1.38; 95% CI

= 1.06-1.78). The separate multivariate analyses indicate that respect for family and risky

behavior approval do not predict likelihood of having well-being.

Table 22. Logistic Regressions of Well-Being by Demographics and School Climate among Non-Military Students and Military Students Predictors Well-Being

OR (95% CI)

Non-Military Military Constant Grade

.02**

.81** (.78-.85) .07** .77** (.74-3.41)

Gender Female (reference) Male

1.00 1.87**(1.60-2.22)

1.00 2.24** (1.52-3.32)

Race/Ethnicity White (reference) Asian//AI/AN/PI/HI Black Mixed Hispanic

1.00 .78 (.54-1.07) 1.61 (.99-2.61) 1.20 (.92-1.57) 1.31* (1.09-1.57)

1.00 .88 (.44-1.75) 1.59 (.74-3.41) .79 (.43-1.44) 1.07 (.67-1.70)

Deployment None (reference) One Two or More

1.00 1.21 (.92-1.57) 1.14 (.89-1.46)

1.00 .67 (.36-1.25) 1.07 (.67-1.71)

Military Military Parent Military Sibling

-- --

1.00 1.12 (.73-1.73)

School Climate Belonging Relationships Safety Meaningful Part. Respect for Family Risky Behavior

1.20** (1.08-1.33) 1.24** (1.09-1.41) .89* (.82-.97) 1.62** (1.46-1.81) .99 (.90-1.08) 1.04 (.91-1.19)

1.26* (.99-1.61) 1.28 (.95-1.74) .79* (.65-.95) 1.38* (1.06-1.78) 1.09 (.87-1.36) .94 (.68-1.29)

(Table 22 continued)

 

85

(Table 22 continued) Model Evaluation % Correctly Predicted -2 Log Likelihood Cox & Snell R2

Nagelkerke R2

Block X2 (df) Model X2 (df) Goodness of fit Homer/Lemeshow

90.4% 4588.41 .05 .10 364.61 (14) 364.61 (14) 10.21

90.1% 776.972 .05 .11 71.59 (15) 71.59 (15) 21.53

`*Significant for differences by military-connected status, p < .05 **Significant for differences by military-connected status, p <.001 Depression. Table 23 shows separate logistic regressions of depression by school climate

among military and non-military students. An increasing level of belonging is associated with a

decreased likelihood of depression for both non-military and military students. Odds ratios were

similar in magnitude for both non-military students (OR=.66; 95% CI = .66-.75) and military

students (OR=.77; 95% CI = .60-.99). In the case of caring relationships, an increasing degree of

caring relationships is associated with a 23% decreased probability of depression among non-

military students (OR=.77; 95% CI=.66-.89). Similarly, an increasing degree of caring

relationships is associated with a 29% decreased likelihood of depression among military

students (OR=.71; 95% CI=.52-.98).

The effects of meaningful participation on depression were also similar in magnitude

among military and non-military students, however, unexpectedly, increasing levels of

meaningful participation are associated with an increased likelihood of depression among non-

military and military students. Among non-military students, the results show a non-significant

result, however, an increasing degree of meaningful participation is associated with a 15%

increased odds of depression (OR=1.15; 95% CI = .99-1.33). Among military students, the

results also show a non-significant result, however, the magnitude of the odds ratio is similar to

the odds ratio for non-military students (OR=1.20; 95% CI = .89-1.60). In the case of risky

 

86

behavior approval, an increasing degree of disapproval of risky behaviors is associated with a

44% decreased odds of depression among non-military students (OR=.56; 95% CI = .48-.66).

Similarly, among military students, an increasing degree of disapproval of risky behaviors is

associated with a 38% decreased odds of depression (OR=.62; 95% CI=.43-.88).

In the case of respect for family, the magnitude of odds ratios for both non-military and

military students were also similar. Among non-military students, lack of respect for family is

associated with a 40% increased odds of depression (OR=1.40; 95% CI=1.25-1.58). The effect of

respect for family on depression is slightly stronger for military students. Among military

students, lack of respect for family is associated with a 48% increased odds of depression

(OR=1.48; 95% CI=1.14-1.92).

Table 23. Logistic Regressions of Depression by Demographics and School Climate among Non-Military Students and Military Students Predictors Depression

OR (95% CI)

Non-Military Military Constant Grade

.56

.94 (.88-1.00) .21* .94 (.82-1.08)

Gender Female (reference) Male

1.00 .99 (.82-1.21)

1.00 1.52 (.97-2.40)

Race/Ethnicity White (reference) Asian//AI/AN/PI/HI Black Mixed Hispanic

1.00 1.46* (1.02-2.08) 1.36 (.71-2.58) 1.21 (.83-1.77) 1.02 (.78-1.21)

1.00 1.17 (.59-2.31) .76 (.28-2.11) 1.01 (.54-1.89) .51 (.28-.93)

Deployment None (reference) One Two or More

1.00 1.02 (.69-1.51) 1.21 (.88-1.66)

1.00 1.07 (.50-2.33) 1.50 (.82-2.38)

Military Military Parent Military Sibling

-- --

1.00 .85 (.50-1.44)

(Table 23 continued)

 

87

(Table 23 continued) School Climate Belonging Relationships Safety Meaningful Part. Respect for Family Risky Behavior

.66** (.59-.75) .77** (.66-.89) 1.02 (.92-1.13) 1.15* (.99-1.33) 1.40** (1.25-1.58) .56** (.48-.66)

.77* (.60-.99) .71* (.52-.98) 1.10 (.89-1.35) 1.20 (.89-1.60) 1.48** (1.14-1.92) .62* (.43-.88)

Model Evaluation % Correctly Predicted -2 Log Likelihood Cox & Snell R2

Nagelkerke R2

Block X2 (df) Model X2 (df) Goodness of fit Homer/Lemeshow

95% 2748.24 .03 .08 194.18 (14) 194.18 (14) 10.72

93.1% 689.60 .03 .09 44.14 (15) 44.14 (15) 5.14

`*Significant for differences by military-connected status, p < .05 **Significant for differences by military-connected status, p <.001

Suicidal Ideation. Table 24 shows logistic regressions of suicidal ideation by school

climate among military and non-military students. In the case of belonging, odds ratios for non-

military and military students were similar in magnitude. Among non-military students, an

increasing level of belonging is associated with a 29% decreased likelihood of suicidal ideation

(OR=.71; 95% CI=.65-.77). Similarly, among military students, an increasing degree of

belonging is associated with a 26% decreased odds of suicidal ideation (OR=.74; 95% CI=.62-

.89). The effect of caring relationships on suicidal ideation among military students is slightly

stronger than the effect seen among non-military students. An increasing level of caring

relationships is associated with a 17% decreased likelihood of suicidal ideation (OR=.83; 95%

CI=.75-.91). Among non-military students, an increasing degree of caring relationships is

associated with a 26% decreased likelihood of suicidal ideation (OR=.74; 95% CI=.59-.93).

A lack of school safety has slight effects on suicidal ideation for both military and non-

military students. Among non-military students, lack of safety is associated with only an 10%

 

88

increased likelihood of suicidal ideation (OR=1.10; 95% CI=1.02-1.18). Similarly, among

military students, lack of safety is associated with only a 3% increased likelihood of suicidal

ideation (OR=1.03; 95% CI=.89-1.19). Odds ratios for lack of respect for family in both non-

military and military populations are similar in magnitude. Among non-military students, lack of

respect for family is associated with a 20% increased likelihood of suicidal ideation (OR=1.20;

95% CI=1.11-1.30). Among military students, lack of respect for family is associated with a 24%

increased likelihood of suicidal ideation (OR=1.24; 95% CI= 1.04-1.48).

The effect of risky behavior disapproval on suicidal ideation among non-military students

is also similar to the effect seen in military students. Among non-military students, increasing

risky behavior disapproval is associated with a 33% decreased probability of suicidal ideation

(OR = .67; 95% CI = .60-75). Among military students, the results show that increasing risky

behavior disapproval is associated with a 25% decreased probability of suicidal ideation

(OR=.75; 95% CI=.58-.97). In the case of meaningful participation, the odds ratios for both non-

military and military student populations are small in magnitude and non-significant. A higher

degree of meaningful participation is associated with a slight decreased odds of suicidal ideation

among non-military students (OR = .88; 95% CI=.81-.97), but a slight increased likelihood of

suicidal ideation among military students (OR = 1.09; 95% CI=.90-1.33).

Table 24. Logistic Regressions of Suicidal Ideation by Demographics and School Climate among Non-Military Students and Military Students (n=14,943) Predictors Suicidal Ideation

OR (95% CI)

Non-Military Military Constant Grade

3.45** .92* (.86-.98)

2.43 .93 (.81-1.08)

Gender Female (reference) Male

1.00 .52** (.48-.62)

1.00 .73 (.54-.99)

(Table 24 continued)

 

89

(Table 24 continued) Race/Ethnicity White (reference) Asian//AI/AN/PI/HI Black Mixed Hispanic

1.00 1.17 (.93-1.49) 1.07 (.70-1.64) 1.26* (1.01-1.57) .86 (.74-1.00)

1.00 1.58* (.93-2.66) 1.10 (.59-2.10) 1.34 (.85-2.11) 1.12 (.76-1.62)

Deployment One Two or more

1.34* (1.09-1.76) 1.46** (1.18-1.80)

.89 (.56-1.43) 1.09 (.75-1.59)

Military Military Parent Military Sibling

-- --

1.00 1.20 (.86-1.66)

School Climate Belonging Relationships Safety Meaningful Part. Respect for Family Risky Behavior

.71** (.65-.77) .83** (.75-.91) 1.10* (1.02-1.18) .88* (.81-.97) 1.20** (1.11-1.30) .67** (.60-.75)

.74** (.62-.89) .74* (.59-.93) 1.03 (.89-1.19) 1.09 (.90-1.33) 1.24* (1.04-1.48) .75* (.58-.97)

Model Evaluation % Correctly Predicted -2 Log Likelihood Cox & Snell R2

Nagelkerke R2

Block X2 (df) Model X2 (df) Goodness of fit Homer/Lemeshow

80.6% 5395.22 .07 .10 392.73 (14) 392.73 (14) 17.73

75% 1042.64 .05 .08 51.17 (15) 51.17 (15) 4.39

`*Significant for differences by military-connected status, p < .05 **Significant for differences by military-connected status, p <.001

School-Level Effects

Analyses were conducted to assess associations between school-level variables and

mental health outcomes. Contrary to expectations, school military concentration and academic

achievement did not significantly predict well-being, depression, and suicidal ideation. However,

school level poverty significantly predicts depression. The results show that a higher degree of

poverty is associated with an increased likelihood of depression (OR = .49; 95% CI = .25-.96).

 

90

Discussion

Using a population sample of middle and high school students in eight military-connected

school districts, this study examines rates of well-being, depression, and suicidal ideation among

students by military connection (non-military students, students with a military parent, and

students with a military sibling). Relationships between school climate and mental health among

military and non-military students, accounting for student demographics and the experience of

deployment were also examined. The results of this study indicate that multiple components of

school climate promote higher rates of well-being and curbs rates of depression and suicidal

ideation among students in military-connected schools, even when accounting for students’

experiences with the deployment of a family member. In addition, logistic regression analyses

conducted show similar effects of school climate on mental health among non-military students,

students with a military parent and students with a military sibling.

Well-Being, Depression and Suicidal Ideation Rates

The bivariate analyses in this study indicate that students with a military sibling have

slightly higher rates of depression than students with military parents, while non-military

students had the highest rates of well-being. This finding supports previous research on the

mental health of military children. These studies have found that the rates of depressive and

psychiatric symptoms among military children and adolescents are significantly higher than

civilian children in the Iraq and Afghanistan war context (Chartrand & Seigel, 2007; Gorman et

al., 2009; Hoshmand & Hoshmand, 2007; Huebner et al., 2009). The greatest discrepancies

between students with a military parent and non-military students were found in suicidal

ideation. This concerning finding may be attributed to the unique military stressors that military

children have experienced during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, which includes multiple and

 

91

prolonged parental deployments. In addition, unlike previous wars, a large proportion of military

service members are from the Reservist force, have less access to mental health services on

military installations and reside in civilian communities where military-specific social supports

are not necessarily available (Bowen, Mancini, Martin, Ware, & Nelson, 2003; MacDermid,

Samer, Schwarz, Nishida, & Nyaronga, 2008; Rohall, Weschler, & Segal, 1999).

Moreover, this finding further develops knowledge about the psychological stressors that

adolescents experience when a sibling is serving in the military (Rodriquez & Margolin, 2011).

A recent qualitative study suggested that the deployment of a sibling was associated with stress

and anxiety among family members, shifts in household roles and responsibilities, alienation

from peers and other social supports, and sadness from temporary separation (Rodriguez &

Margolin, 2011). From a psychological perspective, Rodriguez and Margolin (2011) have

theorized that the sibling relationship is potentially the most enduring family bond that

adolescents experience and that stable and positive sibling relationships are linked to enhanced

cognitive, emotional, moral, and psychosocial outcomes. In addition, during times of family and

household stress, children seek out emotional and social support. In severely stressful cases,

sibling relationships may provide a buffering effect when household and financial stability is at

risk.

School Climate and Mental Health

In this study, multiple components of school climate were significantly associated with

reduced rates of depression and suicidal ideation and higher rates of well-being. This finding

supports a large body of research that a caring and supportive school environment can promote

well-being and curb depression and suicidal ideation. This study is unique since school climate

has multiple constructs—belonging, caring relationships, meaningful participation, risky

 

92

behavior disapproval, and safety. Logistic regression analyses yielded detailed information about

the relationships between each component of school climate and the three indicators of mental

health.

Both belonging and caring relationships had significant associations with well-being,

depression and suicidal ideation. This finding supports research that has found students who feel

connected to their school communities as well as supported and cared for by teachers and other

school staff have enhanced well-being and motivation and lower likelihood of exhibiting

depressive symptoms and thoughts of suicide. One explanation for this finding is that school-

based approaches that promote belonging such as school assemblies, activities, clubs, cultural

displays (i.e. bulletin boards), and extracurricular activities can help create a sanctuary for

students experiencing psychological strain of household and community stressors (Chandra et

al., 2010). In a recent study, McGuire and colleagues (2010) found that school efforts to make a

classroom or school culture accepting of transgendered students influenced the way

transgendered students felt emotionally and socially connected to other students and school staff.

At the same time, these “transgender friendly” approaches transformed the cultural norms of

students and staff, making them more welcoming of transgendered students.

This study has also found that risky behavior disapproval has significant associations

with negative mental health outcomes (depression, suicidal ideation). These findings support

research identifying associations between substance use and negative mental health problems

(depression, suicidal ideation) among adolescents. School climate intervention programs that aim

to prevent substance use among adolescents are utilized in public schools throughout the country,

and have been shown to reduce substance use among middle and high school students.

 

93

Some findings were unexpected and make unique contributions to the school climate

literature. First, the weakest associations were found between safety and each mental health

indicator. This challenges several studies that have found significant relationships between

perceptions of safety and mental health outcomes among middle and high school students. This

finding suggests that other components of school climate (e.g. belonging, caring relationships)

may be more effective in promoting positive mental health and reducing rates of depression and

suicidal ideation. School climate interventions that focus exclusively on safety may prove to be

ineffective in addressing the mental health as well as social and emotional needs of middle and

high school students. Second, this study found that meaningful participation had a positive

relationship with depression, though small in magnitude. It is well-established in past studies that

school engagement leads to enhanced self-concept, self-esteem and general well-being.

However, it may be expected that high achieving students in competitive middle and high

schools who have high levels of engagement and participation in a school community may also

experience much stress and anxiety and if left unaddressed by school counselors and other

mental health professionals, depression and suicidal ideation.

Another major significant finding is that single and multiple deployments were

significantly related to each mental health indicator, even when accounting for multiple

components of school climate. As expected, odds ratios for associations between multiple

deployments and each mental health indicator were larger in magnitude than experiencing a

single deployment. This finding supports studies conducted during the Iraq and Afghanistan

wars, indicating that military-connected adolescents experience tremendous stress and anxiety as

a result of coping with parental separation, constantly shifting roles and responsibilities in the

household, fear of death and injury, and the mental health of a left-behind parent or caregiver

 

94

(Huebner et al., 2007; Rodriguez & Margolin, 2011). Also, unique to the current war context,

military children typically experience multiple deployments of family members. This study was

able to measure multiple deployments, given the survey item asking students to report number of

deployments of family members in the past 10 years. These findings also present a unique

contribution to the current psychological literature on military children and school climate, since

the adverse effects of deployment still persist despite the presence of a supportive school climate.

While deployment remains a strong predictor of mental health outcomes, it should be

noted that relationships between school climate and each mental health category are still

significant. In fact, the magnitude of odds ratios between each school climate component and

mental health category in the deployment model (see Table 21) are still similar to those seen in

the non-deployment model (see Table 20). This finding supports theoretical work and studies

that have found that a supportive school environment still significantly influences mental health

outcomes, even among high-stress populations.

School Climate and Mental Health among Military and Non-Military Students

The results of this study also deepen our knowledge of how the social and emotional

qualities of a school environment influence the mental health outcomes of military children.

Recent qualitative studies on military-connected schools have found that on one hand, some

school staff are struggling to address the social and emotional needs and challenges of military

children, while on the other hand, teachers and other school adults are developing their own

homegrown strategies for making schools more welcoming to military students (Bradshaw et al.,

2010; Mmari et al., 2009). This finding provides empirical support that multiple components of

school climate, especially belonging, caring relationships and family respect, are associated with

lower rates of depression and suicidal ideation as well as enhanced well-being. More detailed

 

95

analyses can be conducted in schools to explore how teachers facilitate belonging, caring

relationships, and respect for family background among military students. Findings from these

potential studies can uncover promising strategies specifically addressing the school-related

challenges of military students.

Also, unique to this study are analyses that allow us to compare associations between

school climate and mental health among military and non-military student populations.

Associations between each component of school climate and mental health category were similar

in magnitude for both military and non-military populations. To date, there have been few

studies that have compared associations between school climate and mental health between

different demographic groups. Given the distinct stressors that military children experience, it is

surprising that a supportive school environment can influence their mental health outcomes

similarly to non-military children. It is possible that staff and students at the military-connected

schools in our sample are attuned to the challenges of military life due to their proximity to

military installations and exposure to military students. Day-to-day experience with military

culture provides school staff with first-hand knowledge to make a school’s social and emotional

climate to suit the needs of military children. Further analyses can measure a school’s awareness

of military culture and how this influences school climate and mental health outcomes among

military students.

Summary

Overall, the findings in this study indicate that there are significant associations between

school climate and mental health, even when accounting for the experience of deployment. In

addition, students with a military sibling reported slightly more adverse mental health outcomes,

while non-military students reported higher rates of well-being. Also, the findings suggest that

 

96

associations between school climate and mental health were still significant among military

students; moreover, the magnitude of associations of school climate and mental health are similar

in magnitude for both military and non-military students. The results of this study suggest that

future theories, educational policies and interventions on the mental health of students in

military-connected schools be focused on enhancing the social and emotional climate of these

school environments.

Limitations

Several limitations in this study must be noted before generalizing findings to current

practice. First, this study examined associations between school contextual variables (i.e. school

academic achievement, poverty level, and military concentration) and mental health, finding no

significant associations. Academic achievement and poverty indicators however were school-

level variables, assigned to all sampled students within a school. Future analyses would need to

also include academic achievement and poverty data at the student level to further assess

relationships between these variables and mental health. Third, logistic regression analyses on

mental health by school climate were conducted in separate samples of military and non-military

children. These analyses were conducted to compare the magnitude of associations between the

two groups of students. Future investigations could explore the relationship between school

climate and mental health also among students with a military sibling. Last, causality cannot be

assumed due to the cross-sectional design of this study.

Implications

The findings from this study highlight the significant role of school climate in promoting

well-being and curbing rates of depression and suicidal ideation among students in military-

connected schools. Research has found that when experiencing parental deployment and other

 

97

military stressors, military children develop healthy coping strategies in supportive family,

household, and community contexts (i.e. easy access to military-specific mental health services)

(Flake et al., 2009; MacDermid et al., 2009); however, this area of research has largely ignored

the role of school climate. Future studies should be aware that the presence of a positive school

climate—caring relationships, belonging, family respect, safety, and risky behavior

disapproval—can influence the mental health outcomes of military children, even accounting for

the stress of deployment. More importantly, the utilization of a theoretically-driven model of

school climate in this study highlights that multiple components of school climate can curb rates

of depression and suicidal ideation and enhance well-being among all students in military-

connected schools.

The findings in this study challenge current trends in federal educational policy (i.e. No

Child Left Behind). Schools are embedded in high stakes accountability for academic

achievement, especially targeting traditionally underserved and low achieving minority groups

(Cochran-Smith, 2005; Greenburg et al., 2003). This policy context contradicts decades of

research and theoretical work highlighting the importance of social and emotional skill building,

mental health and social and emotional climate in improving academic outcomes. Cohen and

colleagues (2010) found that school climate is excluded from general state accountability

systems in almost all fifty states, leaving it up to state educational policy governance structures

to voluntarily pursue school climate improvement. Further, school climate is defined and

measured in various ways, not necessarily defined by the research literature. Findings from this

study suggest that school climate improvement, especially among high risk populations (i.e.

military children) be included in federal and state accountability systems.

 

98

In summary, this study addressed gaps in the military-connected school and military

children and school climate literatures and has implications for future research. Future studies

should continue to investigate how school climate can influence the mental health of students,

both military and non-military, in military-connected schools. Studies that are longitudinal and

multivariate are needed to examine cause and affect relationships. In addition, detailed

qualitative studies are needed to examine how school staff and students in military-connected

schools improve school climate perceptions among students. These studies can generate

homegrown-practices as well as provide more detailed information as to how each component of

school climate can enhance the well-being and curb depression and suicidal ideation rates among

students in military-connected schools.

 

99

Chapter Four:

Victimization of Students in Military-Connected Schools: The Role of School

Climate and Deployment

Introduction

The Children of Military Service Personnel

In recent years, a growing number of studies in psychology, public health and medicine

have examined the social, emotional, and psychological outcomes of the children of military

service members (Burrell, Adams, Durand, & Castro, 2006; Doyle and Peterson, 2005; Gorman,

Eide, & Hisle-Gorman, 2010; Reed, Bell, & Edwards, 2011). Since 2002, the Department of

Defense Educational Activity (DoDEA) estimates that about 2 million children (ages 0-18) have

experienced the deployment of a parent, and a large proportion of these children have

experienced multiple parental deployments. DoDEA recently estimated that there are about 1.2

million school-aged children of active-duty military service members. An additional 625,000

children of National Guard, and 705,000 children of Reserve members attend public schools

operated by local educational agencies. 80% of these students comprise a significant minority of

students (at least 400 students or more than 10% of total student enrollment) in 214 school

districts in the United States (Kitmitto et al., 2011). Public schools that serve a significant

number or proportion of military students (about 400 military students or 4% of total student

enrollment) are known as military-connected schools (Kitmitto et al., 2011).

Studies have found that military children have more adverse psychological, social, and

emotional outcomes than their civilian peers in the present Iraq and Afghanistan war context.

Recently, a retrospective cohort study on military children and military deployments found that

during the 2005-2006 fiscal year the number of mental and behavioral health visits increased by

 

100

11%, behavioral disorders increased by 19%, and stress disorders increased by 18% in military

children when a military parent deployed (Gorman et al., 2010). In addition, rates increased

particularly in adolescents and children of married and male military parents (Gorman et al.,

2010). Other studies have suggested that since the beginning of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars,

there has been a gradual increase in depressive symptoms, high levels of anxiety, and

oppositional behavior in schools (Doyle & Peterson, 2005; Flake, Davis, Johnson, & Middleton,

2009; Galovski & Lyons, 2004; Gorman, Eide, & Hisle-Gorman, 2010; Reed, Bell, & Edwards,

2011).

The Experience of Deployment

A large body of research indicates that deployment related stressors negatively impact the

psychological, social, and emotional issues of military children. During this period (i.e. pre-

deployment, deployment, reunion, and reintegration), military children experience parental

separation (Huebner, Mancini, Wilcox, Grass, & Grass, 2007), geographic relocation and school

transitions (Bradshaw, Sudhinaraset, Mmari, & Blum, 2010; Medway & Merchant, 1987), and

fear of death and injury of a deployed parent (Cozza, Chun, & Pollo, 2005; Flake et al., 2009;

Mmari, Roche, Sudhinaraset, & Blum, 2009). Military children also experience the daily stress

and anxiety of a left-behind parent (Cozza, Chun, & Polo, 2005; Morris & Age, 2009). The stress

and anxiety of the left-behind parent negatively impacts the psychological and behavioral

outcomes of military children (Cozza et al., 2005; Flake et al., 2009). Cozza and colleauges

(2005) found that left-behind parents share with their children developmentally inappropriate

information and communicate their own sense of grief and loss related to the fear of spousal

injury or death. In addition, left-behind family members must also redistribute household roles

and responsibilities (Faber, Willerton, Clymer, MacDermid, & Weiss, 2008; Huebner et al.,

 

101

2007). In a qualitative study of adolescent youth with deployed parents, Huebner et al. (2007)

found that military adolescents assumed household chores and responsibilities previously

designated to adults, including taking care of siblings and supporting left-behind parents

financially. While adolescents with deployed parents experience anxiety from growing

household responsibilities, Huebner and colleagues (2007) also found that they exhibited pride

for making adult household contributions.

After a deployed parent is reunited with his or her family, the experience of post-

deployment reintegration can be also stressful. Studies have found that reintegrated military

families must deal with re-shifting household responsibilities and roles, the financial stress of a

veterans’ re-establishment of employment, and re-establishing a relationship with a reunited

parent after months or even years of separation (Burrell et al., 2006; Doyle & Peterson, 2005;

Peebles-Kleiger & Kleiger, 1994). These stressors have been found to result in negative social

and psychological outcomes among military children (Burrell et al., 2006; Doyle & Peterson,

2005; Peebles-Kleiger & Kleiger, 1994). Adolescents, in particular, struggle with relinquishing

adult responsibilities attained when a parent was a deployed (Huebner et al., 2007). In more

severe cases, military children experience significant stress and anxiety during the post-

deployment reintegration period when the veteran returns with a war-related trauma illness or

post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Galovski & Lyons, 2004; Jordan et al., 1992; Rosenheck

& Nathan, 1986; Solomon, 1988). In studies conducted in different war contexts (including the

Iraq and Afghanistan wars), research has found that veteran trauma is related to marital

problems, unstable family systems, poor parenting, secondary traumatization between a veteran

and his or her child, and higher rates of domestic violence (Al-Turkait & Ohaeri, 2008; Goff,

Crow, Reisbig, & Hamilton, 2007; Jordan et al. 1992; Rosenheck & Fontana, 1998; Rosenheck

 

102

& Nathan, 1985). Not surprisingly, a few studies suggest that military children of veteran parents

with war-related trauma develop mental health and secondary trauma issues. Moreover, some

families dealing with veteran war trauma have difficulty seeking help due to lack of access

and/or cultural stigma (Burrell et al., 2006; Caselli & Motta, 1995; Solomon, 1990).

Victimization of Military Children in Schools

Research has indicated that minority children (i.e. race and ethnicity, gender, cultural

group) and psychologically strained student populations often feel alienated from peers and

school adults and experience challenges with social and academic functioning; consequently,

they often become targets of physical and non-physical victimization (Eisenberg, Neumark-

Sztainer, & Perry, 2003; Lynch & Cicchetti, 1997; Townsend, 2000). In the case of military

children, recent qualitative studies have shown that they struggle more with social and academic

functioning within the school and classroom contexts and may feel a greater sense of

disengagement and alienation when compared to their civilian peers. These findings suggest that

military children are more vulnerable to school violence and victimization than civilian peers

(Chandra, Martin, Hawkins, & Richardson, 2010; Mmari et al., 2009). In a study of children of

deployed soldiers, school staff and parents reported that some military students struggled with

maintaining focus in the classroom as well as emotional regulation with teachers and peers

(Chandra et al, 2010). Participants in the study attributed academic and social functioning

problems of military students to deployment-related parental absence, increased responsibilities

at home, poor mental health of some non-deployed parents, and difficulty accessing mental

health services. In addition, Bradshaw and colleagues (2010) found that due to multiple

transitions, military students had difficulty with making friends, adjusting to new physical school

 

103

environments, and proactively seeking academic and emotional support from school staff and

peers.

Not surprisingly, research shows early indicators that military children are vulnerable to

physical and non-physical victimization in schools (Chandra et al., 2010; Mmari et al., 2009). In

a study of military adolescents with deployed parents, school personnel and home caregivers

reported that military adolescents exhibited increased behavior problems, including fights with

other students at school (Mmari et al., 2009). Moreover, Chandra and colleagues (2010) found

that military children were bullying victims of anti-war student perpetrators. While the preceding

studies have uncovered concerning findings about military children and their risk of

victimization, these studies had exploratory objectives and small purposive samples. Hence, it is

difficult to make generalizations about the victimization rates of military children and risk and

protective factors within the school context. Future studies concerning the victimization rates

among military children in public schools and potential protective factors in the school context

must utilize large population samples of students in military-connected schools with reliable and

detailed measures of victimization.

School Climate and Victimization

A large body of research has indicated that a school’s social and emotional climate

influence rates of student victimization and violence (Eisenberg et al., 2003; Elliot, Gregory, &

Fan, 2010; Hoy, Smith, & Sweetland, 2002; Hoy, Tarter, & Bliss, 1990). A school’s climate has

multiple components, including supportive teacher-student relationships, high levels of

meaningful participation, a safe school environment, a sense of belonging, and a school’s respect

for a student’s family and cultural background (Cohen, McCabe, Michelli, & Pickerall; 2009;

Zullig, Koopman, Patton, & Ubbes, 2010).

 

104

Relationships and Risky Behavior Disapproval. In studies conducted in diverse

locales, supportive teacher and peer relationships have been found to create safer school

environments and a school-wide culture that discourages various risky behaviors on school

grounds (i.e. violence and drugs). In a study of Israeli high school students, Marachi, Astor, &

Benbenishty (2006) found that higher levels of teacher support were associated with lower rates

of victimization. Similarly, Wilson (2004) found that caring student-teacher relationships,

student-peer relationships, and respect for authority are related to decreased physical and

relational aggression (e.g. verbal harassment). In addition, research has suggested that in school

environments comprised of trusting and nurturing teacher-student relationships, students adopt

attitudes and behaviors that prevent school violence. In a study of high schools in Virginia, Eliot,

Cornell, Gregory, & Fan (2010) found that in schools where students perceived more peer and

teacher social and emotional support, students tended to endorse positive attitudes toward

seeking help from school staff for bullying and threats of violence among peers.

Research has also suggested that when supportive teacher-student relationships are

present, teachers and students are able to establish a collective understanding of school-level

procedures that address school violence and other risky behaviors (Brand, Felner, Shim,

Seitsinger, & Dumas, 2003). Teachers are also able to facilitate active student participation in

monitoring and reporting the violent behaviors of their peers, and pro-social relationships among

students (Brand, Felner, Shim, Seitsinger, & Dumas, 2003). In a national study of Israeli

secondary students, Khoury-Kassabri, Benbenishty, & Astor (2005) found that in both Jewish

and Arab schools, a student’s understanding of school violence policies and procedures and

positive relationships with teachers was negatively associated with several victimization types,

including serious physical victimization. In addition, when students are involved in the decision-

 

105

making process for responding to school violence, Khoury-Kassabri and colleagues (2005) found

significantly lower rates of all victimization types. In a study of American secondary students in

urban schools, Brand and colleagues (2003) found that consistently implemented school

discipline policies and procedures and students’ perceptions of a clarity of rules and expectations

facilitated students' behavioral adjustment. In contrast, disciplinary harshness was negatively

associated with students’ behavioral adjustment.

Respect for Cultural and Family Background. A large body of literature on culturally

responsive pedagogy and classroom management has theorized that teachers and other school

staff need to be more sensitive and conscious of cultural expressions and historical experiences

of racial discrimination before judging the school behaviors of racial and ethnic minority youth.

Similarly, a recent review of literature on the children of military personnel suggests that school

staff need training on military families and culture to be more responsive to the academic and

emotional needs of military children (De Pedro et al., 2011). Empirically, culturally relevant

responses have been recently examined among youth who self-identify as transgendered. In a

mixed-methods study of transgendered youth and school climate, McGuire, Toomey, & Russell

(2010) found that specific school violence prevention strategies designed for transgendered

youth such as teacher training on transgendered identity were associated with feelings of safety,

connectedness to school staff, and less harassment among transgendered students.

Belonging. Belonging has also been shown to be associated with reduced rates of student

victimization. Studies have indicated that schools with high connectedness have lower

victimization rates, including physical aggression, than schools with low connectedness (Wilson,

2004). The prevalence of destructive social behaviors is also affected by connectedness. For

example, highly connected middle school students were less likely than less connected students

 

106

to report regular smoking, drinking, and marijuana use outside of school (Bond et al., 2004). In

addition, Bonny and colleagues (2000) found that highly connected middle school students in

urban districts reported fewer psychosomatic health symptoms, fewer nurse visits, and less

regular use of cigarettes, and alcohol.

Meaningful Participation and Safety. Other components of school climate such as

meaningful participation and safety can potentially exert a positive influence on creating positive

school climates and academic outcomes. This is especially evident when teachers, students, and

other members of a school community have active, participatory roles in organizing how spaces

in schools are utilized for instruction. In a qualitative study of a charter school specializing in

environmental studies and cooperative learning, Gislason (2009) found that the school’s open

house space and extended instructional block scheduling demanded collaboration among the

teachers and students in planning and instruction. However, Gislason (2009) found that open

spaces created barriers to the efficient use of classroom time and space (i.e. more noise, traffic,

students having difficulty hearing at the periphery of spaces, and extra effort to control

acoustics). In response to these barriers, Gislason found that students exerted a high degree of

ownership over the house setting and high level of self-motivation as a result of a cooperative

model and the need to create an orderly classroom space. In contrast, research has also found that

spaces that are unmonitored or “unowned” by teachers, students, and other school staff are

spaces prone to school violence. In a qualitative study of five high schools, Astor and colleagues

(1999) found that violent spaces occurred primarily in spaces such as hallways, dining areas, and

parking lots when school staff members were absent.

The preceding studies indicate that multiple components of school climate promote lower

rates of victimization. Conducted in different geographic contexts, the reviewed studies also

 

107

suggest that school climate’s effect on victimization can be generalized in almost any school

context. To date, studies have not yet examined the social and emotional qualities of military-

connected schools and associations between school climate and victimization among children

enrolled in these schools. Also, as previously mentioned, studies have begun to suggest that

military students may be engaged in school violence at higher rates than their civilian peers,

however, to date, only one study has examined these rates using a normative sample (Reed et al.,

2011). Further, no studies have yet examined associations between school climate and rates of

student victimization. Also, it is not clear if associations between school climate and

victimization are different for military children, when compared to non-military children or if

school climate can still influence victimization rates even when students are experiencing the

emotional toll of the deployment of a family member.

This study serves to fill the current gaps in studies examining the victimization of

military children and the role of school climate. I evaluate and compare the victimization rates of

military children (with a parent or sibling in the military) and non-military children as well as

examine relationships between school climate and mental health. Drawing from research on the

victimization of minority children, it is expected that military children have higher rates of

victimization than non-military children. There has also been a wide breadth of research on

school climate and victimization, and it is expected that school climate is associated with

reduced victimization rates. Moreover, considering research on the protective effects of school

climate on the victimization of psychologically strained student populations, it is also expected

that a supportive school climate would promote positive mental health outcomes even if students

have experienced military stressors such as a deployment.

 

108

Multiple objectives guide this study. First, this study compares the victimization rates of

military and non-military students (i.e. having a parent in the military or having a sibling in the

military). Second, this study assesses associations between multiple components of school

climate and victimization. Third, this study evaluates the effects of school climate on

victimization among military and non-military students. Last, this study seeks to examine

associations between deployment and victimization. The data from this dissertation is drawn

from two sources, the California Healthy Kids Survey and Dataquest, school-level data and

statistics on academic achievement and school demographics, from the California Department of

Education.

Methods

California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS)

Core and military-connected modules. One of the data sources utilized in this study is

the 2011 California Healthy Kids survey (CHKS). The data from the California Healthy Kids

Survey (CHKS) is comprised of individual level data where individuals are also identified by

school, county, and local educational agency (i.e. public school district). The CHKS is the largest

statewide survey of resiliency, protective factors, and risk behaviors in the United States and is

collected from students at the elementary, middle, and high school levels (Austin, Bates & Duerr,

2011). The CHKS is comprised of several modules, including the core module. The core module

includes data on demographics (e.g. age, grade, gender, race and ethnicity), health-related

behaviors, tobacco use, drug use, violence behaviors, bullying, victimization, and school climate

(Austin et al., 2011).

The CHKS also includes the military-connected module. In 2010, a research team at the

University of Southern California and West Ed collaborated to create the CHKS military-

 

109

connected module in response to a growing awareness among researchers and educators on the

social, emotional, psychological and academic needs of military children. Congress directed the

U.S. Department of Education (DoE) and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) to address these

gaps (U.S. Department of Defense, 2008). The military-connected module is administered to

parents, school staff, and students to gather their views of their schools and the educational,

developmental, and health-related needs of their students (Austin, Bates & Duerr, 2011). The

military connected module includes military demographic item as well as items on exposure to

deployment, school transitions, family dynamics, parent-school relationships, mental health,

positive well-being, is comprised of demographic items that identify military students and items

that measure students’ perceptions of school supports for military children. The student military

connected module is administered to both military and non-military students in military-

connected schools. The present study utilizes data from both the core module and military-

connected modules collected in Spring 2011. The CHKS core module included 115 items in the

middle school version and 126 items in the high school version.

Data collection procedure. The CHKS core module and the military-connected module

were administered in the Spring of 2011 in eight military-connected school districts serving

elementary, middle, and high school students, surrounding military bases in the San Diego

metropolitan area. The participating schools were required to survey all students in grades 5,7, 9,

and 11. Since the focus of this dissertation is on secondary students, data collected from 7th, 9th,

and 11th graders will be analyzed. Prior to the survey administered at a secondary school site,

parental consent was gathered for each participating student. Surveys were also sealed in

envelopes for classrooms in schools. The envelopes reported the number of students absent in

these classes at the day of the survey. There were 599 envelopes. The surveys were administered

 

110

by school staff members or by USC team members. Proctoring instructions and trainings were

given to all survey administrators and an introductory script was read to the participating

students. The USC research team provided survey administrators with gift cards as incentives, in

order to facilitate high response rates. Participants were encouraged to answer questions honestly

and assured their responses would remain anonymous. Participants were allowed to withdraw

from the survey at any time. The core and military-connected modules took approximately 2

hours to complete.

The data used in this study is a subsample of 14,943 7th, 9th and 11th graders, The overall

number of enrolled students eligible to participate in the survey was 18,701. Absent students and

students whose parents refused permission to participate in the study were excluded from the

study sample. The final response rate was 86.73%.

California Department of Education School Level Data

The CHKS dataset used for this dissertation was merged 2010 Accountability Progress

data, which is made publically available by the California Department of Education. California’s

comprehensive accountability system has monitored the academic achievement of every public

school in California. The accountability system is based on state requirements established by the

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (California Department of Education, 2011). The data

includes information pertaining to state and federal accountability requirements, including on

academic performance index (API), adequate yearly progress (AYP), and program improvement

(PI). In addition, API, AYP, and PI school-level data by subgroup (e.g. racial or ethnic group,

special education and English Learner status) is disaggregated.

API can be used as a measure of a school’s academic achievement level. A base API

score is calculated from the following indicators: Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR)

 

111

test indicators in core academic subjects (English language arts, math, science, and history-social

science), California Modified Assessment (CMA) test results, California Alternate Performance

Assessment (CAPA) results, and California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE) results

(California Department of Education, 2011). The API scores fall into a numeric index ranging

from 200 to 1000. After calculation of API, schools receive accountability information in API

reports. These reports include base API and a growth API. The Base API starts the reporting

cycle and is released approximately a year after testing. For example, the 2010 Base is calculated

from results of statewide testing in spring 2010 but is released the following school year. The

Growth API, released after Base API, is calculated with the same indicators as the prior year

Base API but from test results of the following year. For example, the 2011 Growth is calculated

from results of statewide testing in spring 2011 and is released the following school year.

Data related to socio-economic status (SES) of school is provided. This includes percent

of students qualifying for free and reduced priced meals. The USDA determines federal

eligibility requirements for students to receive free and reduced price lunch (California

Department of Education, 2011). The USDA Department’s guidelines for free and reduced price

meals were obtained by multiplying the 2011 Federal Income poverty guidelines by 1.30 and

1.85 respectively, and by rounding the result upward to the next whole dollar. The data in this

dissertation includes percent of students who qualify for free and reduced priced meals by

school. This variable is also commonly used by educational researchers as an indicator of SES

and poverty concentration in a school.

 

112

Measures

Dependent Variables

Victimization. As seen in Table 25, participants were asked about their victimization on

school property in the past year (α = .792). Eight items were used for this construct: During the

past 12 months, how many times on school property have you…been pushed, shoved, slapped,

hit, or kicked by someone who wasn’t just kidding around; been afraid of being beaten up; been

in a physical fight; had mean rumors or lies spread about you; had sexual jokes, comments

gestures made to you; been made fun of because of your looks or the way you talk; had your

property stolen or deliberately damaged, such as your car, clothing, or books; been threatened or

injured with a weapon (gun, knife, club, etc). The responses to these items were on a four-point

Likert scale and ranged from 1 = 0 times, 2 = 1 time, 3 = 2-3 times. A composite victimization

scale was created by summing the responses, and then, the scale was dichotomized—0 no

victimization, 1 victimization.

Table 25. Domains, Scales and Items for the Victimization Variable Items Victimization “During the past 12 months, how many times on school property

have you… …been pushed, shoved slapped, hit or kicked by someone who wasn’t just kidding around?” …been in a physical fight?” …had mean rumors or lies spread about you?” …had sexual jokes, comments, gestures made to you?” …been made fun of because of your looks or the way you talk?” …had your property stolen or deliberately damaged, such as your car, clothing, or books?” …been threatened or injured with a weapon (gun, knife, club, etc)?” The possible responses to these items were A) 0 times; B) 1 time; C) 2-3 times.

 

113

Independent Variables

School Climate Perceptions. According to the school climate literature, there are

multiple dimensions of school climate in the school context. The CHKS core module provides

items covering multiple dimensions of school climate. These include sense of safety, relationship

with adults, belonging, and peer risky climate, meaningful participation, and school’s respect for

a student’s family. Table 26 shows the items that comprise the composite scales that represent

school climate.

Safety. Two items asked respondents about their perceptions of safety in their schools (α

= .812). One item is “I feel safe in my school.” The responses to this item were on a five point

Likert scale and ranged from 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neither disagree or agree,

4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly agree. The second item is “How safe do you feel when you are at

school?” The responses to this item were 1 = Very safe, 2 = Safe, 3 = Neither safe nor unsafe, 4

= Unsafe, 5 = Very unsafe. The item responses were not congruent. The second item was

recoded as 1 = Very Unsafe, 2 = Unsafe, 3 = Neither safe nor unsafe, 4 = Safe, 5= Very Safe.

The composite score of each participant was derived by summing up the two items and dividing

by two. Therefore, the safety scale scores range from 1-5.

Relationship with Adults. In this scale, participants were asked about their relationships

with adults in the school (α = .880). Six items were used for this construct: At my school, there is

a teacher or some other adult who tells me I do a good job; who tells me when I do good; who

notices when I’m not there; who always wants me to do my best; who listens to me when I have

something to say; who believes I will be a success. The responses to these items were on a four-

point Likert scale and ranged from 1 = Not at all true, 2= A little true, 3 = Pretty much true, 4 =

 

114

Very much true. The composite score of each participant was derived by summing up the six

items and dividing by six. Therefore, the relationships scale scores range from 1-4.

Belonging. In this scale, participants were asked about their sense of belonging (α =

.797). Three items were used for this construct: Strongly agree or disagree with, I feel close to

people at this school; I am happy to be at this school; I feel like I am part of this school The

possible responses to these items were on a five-point Likert scale and ranged from 1 = Strongly

disagree, 2= Disagree, 3 = Neither disagree or agree, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly agree. The

composite score of each participant was derived by summing up the three items and dividing by

three. Therefore, the safety scale scores range from 1-5.

Risky Behavior Approval. In this scale, participants were asked about their perceptions of

risky behaviors (α = .900). Six items were used for this construct: How do you feel about

someone your own age smoking one or more packs of cigarettes a day; having one or more

drinks of alcohol every day; trying marijuana or hashish; using marijuana once a month or more,

carrying a weapon to school; how would your friends feel about you smoking one or more packs

of cigarettes a day? The possible responses to these items were on a three-point Likert scale and

ranged from 1 = Neither approve or disapprove, 2= Somewhat disapprove, 3 = Strongly

disapprove. The composite score of each participant was derived by summing up the six items

and dividing by six. Therefore, the safety scale scores range from 1-3.

Meaningful Participation. In this scale, participants were asked about their meaningful

participation at school (α = .742). Three items were used for this construct: I do interesting

activities at school; At school, I help decide things like class activities; I do things that make a

difference. The possible responses to these items were on a four-point Likert scale and ranged 1

= Not at all true, 2= A little true, 3 = Pretty much true, 4 = Very much true. The composite score

 

115

of each participant was derived by summing up the three items and dividing by 3. Therefore, the

safety scale scores range from 1-4.

Respect for Family. Two items asked participants to report their school’s for their family

life. The first item was “Adults in this school respect my family.” The second item asked

participants to report school adult’s understanding for their family life. The item was “Other

students in school do not really understand my family life.” The possible responses to this item

were 1 = Not at all true, 2= A little true, 3 = Pretty much true, 4 = Very much true. The items are

not congruent. The second item was reverse coded. The composite score of each participant was

derived by summing up the two items. Therefore, the safety scale scores range from 1-4.

Table 26. Domains, Scales and Items for the School Climate Variables Variable Items Belonging “Strongly agree or disagree with…

…I feel close to people at this school.” …I am happy to be at this school.” …I feel like I am part of this school.” The possible responses to these items were A) Strongly disagree; 2) Disagree; 3) Neither disagree or agree; 4) Agree; 5) Strongly agree.

Relationships with Adults

“At my school there is a teacher or some other adult who… …tells me I do a good job.” …tells me when I do good.” …who notices me when I’m not there.” …who always wants me to do my best.” …who notices when I’m not there.” …who always wants me to do my best.” …who listens to me when I have something to say.” …who believes I will be a success.” The possible responses to these items were A) Not at all true; 2) A little true; 3) Pretty much true; 4) Very much true;

Safety “I feel safe in my school.” A) Strongly Disagree; 2) Disagree; 3) Neither disagree or agree; 4) Agree; 5) Strongly agree. “How safe do you feel when you are at school?” A) Very safe; B) Safe; C) Neither safe nor unsafe; D) Unsafe; E) Very unsafe.

(Table 26 continued)

 

116

(Table 26 continued) Meaningful Participation

“At school… …I do interesting things at school.” …I help decide things like class activities.” …I do things that make a difference.” The possible responses to this item were A) Not at all true; B) A little true; C) Pretty much true; D) Very much true; E) Don’t know.

Approval of Risky Behaviors

“How do you feel about… …someone your own age smoking one or more packs of cigarettes a day.” …having one or more drinks of alcohol every day.” …trying marijuana or hashish.” …using marijuana once a month or more.” …carrying a weapon to school.” The possible responses to this item were A) Neither approve nor disapprove; B) Somewhat disapprove; C) Strongly disapprove

Respect for Family

“Adults in this school respect my family.” “Other students in school do not really understand my family.” The possible responses to this item were A) Not at all true; B) A little true; C) Pretty much true; D) Very much true; E) Don’t know.

Deployment (Past Ten Years). As seen in Table 27, one item asked participants to report

their experiences with the deployment of a family member. The item was “About your family

and the military, as far as you can remember, how many times in the last 10 years did any

member of your family leave home and serve (deploy) outside the USA?” The possible

responses to this item were 1 = Never, 2 = Once, and 3 = Twice or more. Two dummy variables

were created: Deployment (1 time) and deployment (2 or more times).

Table 27. Deployment Item Variable Item Deployment “As far as you can remember, how many times in the past 10 years

did any member of your family leave home and serve (deploy) outside the USA?” The possible responses to this item were A) Never; B) Once; C) Twice or more; D) Don’t know.

 

117

Demographic Variables. As seen in Table 28, four main demographic characteristics

were represented in this study—race and ethnicity, gender, grade level, and military connection.

Race and Ethnicity. Two items were used to determine the racial and ethnic backgrounds

of the participants. Participants were asked, “What is your race?” the possible responses were 1 =

American Indian or Alaska Native, 2 = Asian, 3= Black or African-American, 5 = Native

Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and 5 = White. Another item asked, “Are you of Hispanic or Latino

origin?” The possible responses were 1) Yes and 2) No. A variable was computed for race and

ethnicity and the categories were 1) Asian/AI/NH/PI 2) Black 3) White 4) Mixed 5)

Hispanic/Latino. Then, race and ethnicity was represented by five dummy variables—

Asian/AI/NH/PI, Black, White, Mixed, and Hispanic/Latino.

Grade level. One item was used to determine the grade of the participants. Participants

were asked, “What grade are you in? The possible responses were 1) 6th grade, 2) 7th grade, 3) 8th

grade, 4) 9th grade, 5) 10th grade, 6) 11th grade, 7) 12th grade, 8) Other grade. Grade level was

represented by a series of dummy variables: 7th grade, 9th grade, and 11th grade.

Gender. Participants were asked to report their gender. They were asked, “What is your

sex?” and the possible responses were 1 = male and 2 = female. The items were recoded as 0 =

female and 1 = male. Gender was represented by a dummy variable coded as 1= female and 0 =

male.

Military-Connection. One item was used to determine a respondent’s military connection.

Participants were asked to report their connection to the military in one item. The item asks

participants, “Who in your family is in the military (Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, national

Guard or Reserves)?” the possible responses were 1 = No one in my family is in the military, 2 =

Father, 3 = Mother, 4 = Brother or sister, and 5 = Grandparent or other relative. Based on the

 

118

literature, military connection is defined as having a parent or sibling serving in the military.

Thus, the variable was recoded with the following categories: 0) Not in the military 2) Having a

military parent and 3) Having a military sibling. Military connection was represented by two

dummy variables: Having a military parent, having a military sibling.

Table 28. Domains, Scales and Items for the Demographic Variables Variable Items Gender “What is your sex?”

Respondents chose one of the following: A) Male and B) Female. Grade “What grade are you in?”

Respondents chose one of the following: A) 6th grade; B) 7th grade; C) 8th grade; D) 9th grade; E) 10th grade; F) 11th grade; G) 12th grade; H) Other grade; I) Ungraded

Race and Ethnicity

“What is your race?” Possible responses included A) American Indian or Alaska Native; B) Asian; C) Black or African American; D) Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander; E) White; F) Mixed (two or more) races. “Are you of Hispanic or Latino origin?” Respondents chose one of the following: A) No; B) Yes

Military Connection

“Who in your family is in the military (Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, National Guard, or Reserves)? Respondents could mark more than one of the following answers: A) No one in my family is in the military; B) Father; C) Mother; D) Brother or sister; E) Grandparent or other relative; F) Don’t know

School Level Variables

Taken from publically available CDE data, two school-level variables were also used to

represent two school contextual factors surrounding school climate effects on mental health and

victimization—academic performance index (API) and free and reduced price lunch. A third

school-level variable, military concentration, was generated from student level data from the

CHKS military-connected module.

Academic Performance Index (API). To obtain a school’s base API score, the

following indicators are calculated: Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) test indicators

in core academic subjects (English language arts, math, science, and history-social science),

 

119

California Modified Assessment (CMA) test results, California Alternate Performance

Assessment (CAPA) results, and California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE) results.

The API scores fall into a numeric index ranging from 200 to 1000.

Free and Reduced Price Meals. The California Department of Education also publishes

the percentage of students who qualify for free and reduced price meals in each school. The

USDA determines federal eligibility requirements for students to receive free and reduced price

lunch. The USDA Department’s guidelines for free and reduced price meals were obtained by

multiplying the 2011 Federal Income poverty guidelines by 1.30 and 1.85 respectively, and by

rounding the result upward to the next whole dollar.

1. Military Concentration. The military-connected module in the CHKS includes an

item that asks participants the following: “Who in your family is in the military

(Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, National Guard, or Reserves?” The possible

responses are A) No one in my family is in the military, B) Father, C) Mother, D)

Brother or sister; E) Grandparent or other relative; F) Don’t know. The item was

recoded as 1 - Having a parent in the military and 0 - No parent in the military. A

variable aggregated at the school level was created. This aggregate variable represents

the proportion of students with a military parent in a school.

Analytical Plan

The goal of this study is to examine the relationship between school climate and mental

health—well-being, depression, and suicidal ideation—among students in military-connected

schools. Associations between school climate and mental health among all students and within

military and non-military student populations were examined. In addition, the relationship

between school climate and mental health, controlling for deployment was assessed.

 

120

The data was analyzed using bivariate, and multivariate analyses. First, cross-tabulations

were generated to compare the victimization rates among non-military students, students with a

military parent and students with a military sibling. Chi-square analyses were also conducted to

determine significant associations between military connection and victimization. Correlational

analyses were then conducted to assess associations between school climate and victimization.

Next, multivariate analyses using logistic regression were then conducted. The logistic

regression technique is used when the dependent variable is limited or constrained to a

dichotomous outcome. The dependent variable in this study was nominal and dichotomous and

coded as 0 or 1. A direct method procedure was used to assess the predictive value of

independent variables of interest, while controlling for other independent variables. Separate

logistic regression analyses were also conducted to assess relationships between school climate

and victimization within each group of students by military-connection—non-military students,

students with a military parent, and students with a military sibling. Logistic regression analyses

were also conducted to assess relationships between deployment and victimization, controlling

for demographics and school climate.

Prior to conducting the logistic regression analyses, several decisions were made to

evaluate the logistic regression models. First, statistical significance tests were set at p < .05.

Second, it was determined that the strength of each independent variable would be measured by

the odds ratios and confidence intervals of each predictor. Odds ratios and confidence intervals,

instead of individual regression coefficients, provide the researcher easier interpretation of

results and are generally used in studies with large samples. Third, a series of indicators, the

likelihood ratio test, Cox & Snell R2, Nagelkerke R2, were used to determine if each logistic

model was a model fit. A logistic model is said to provide a better fit to the data if it

 

121

demonstrates an improvement over the intercept model, which contains no predictors. Fourth,

goodness-of-fit statistics were used to assess the fit of a logistic model against observed

outcomes. The inferential goodness-of-fit statistic used in this study is the Hosmer-Lemeshow

(H-L) test. The H-L statistic is a Pearson chi-square statistic calculated from a 2 x g table of

observed and estimated expected frequencies, where g is the number of groups formed from the

estimated probabilities. A non-significant H-L statistic indicates that there is no significant

difference between the observed frequencies and the expected frequencies derived from the

model, and hence, the model fits the data well. Fifth, the percent correct prediction statistic was

evaluated to determine the percent of all cases correctly predicted in each logistic regression

model. This statistic is an indicator of predictive power of each logistic regression model. . In

this study, overall percent correct prediction statistics for all logistic regression models ranged

from 71.3% to 77.8%. Also, the number of cases observed to be 0 that were correctly predicted

to be 0 ranged from 76 to 113. The number of cases observed to be 1 that were correctly

predicted to be 1 ranged from 292 to 7579.

Sixth, listwise case deletion was used for the logistic regression models. Last, additional

analyses were also conducted to account for school-level factors, and statistical interactions

incorporating school-level factors and military connection were also conducted; however, no

significant statistical interactions. SPSS 19 was utilized in all univariate, bivariate, and

regression analyses.

Other advanced multivariate statistical techniques was considered for this study. First, a

multivariate linear regression (MLR) approach was considered. MLR is utilized for continuous

outcome variables. It was determined that a multivariate model with a dichotomous variable

representing victimization (yes/no) would have greater interpretability than a model utilizing a

 

122

continuous victimization variable. Second, a two-level hierarchical linear model (HLM) was

prepared to assess the effects of school-level and individual-level variables on victimization;

however, preliminary analyses indicated an intra-class correlation coefficient of .035. Due to the

lack of practical significance for explaining 3.5% of between school variation, HLM was deemed

inappropriate for this study.

Results

Descriptive Statistics of the Sample

In the first step of analysis, descriptive statistics were conducted to determine the

demographic characteristics of the overall sample and demographic differences between military

and non-military students. Table 29 shows that the sample is almost evenly split by male and

female and by grade level (7th, 9th, and 11th grades). The results indicate a diverse sample of

students by race and ethnicity. Almost three-fourths of the sample (72.7%) is non-white.

Hispanic students comprise largest racial/ethnic group in the sample (50.3%), while Black

students comprise the smallest proportion of students (3.0%). Table 29 also shows that military-

connected students comprised almost 15% of the sample. About 4.2% of the sample is comprised

of students with a military sibling, while 8.8% of the students have a parent in the military.

86.9% of the sample are classified as non-military.

Bivariate analyses were also conducted within three subsamples—non-military students,

students with a parent serving in the military and students with siblings serving in the military.

When compared to the proportions of students by race and ethnicity for the non-military sample,

Table 29 indicates that among students with a military parent, Asian, Black, and Mixed students

represent a larger proportion of total students (12.1%, 7.2%, and 18.1%, respectively), while

Hispanic students represent a smaller proportion (36.9%). Among students with a sibling, white

 

123

students are slightly overrepresented (31.7%). When compared to the proportions of students by

grade in the non-military group, Table 29 indicates that among students with a military parent,

students are slightly younger overall. 40.6% of students with a military parent are 7th graders,

while 25.8% are 11th graders. In contrast, the results suggest that students with siblings serving in

the military are a slightly younger group when compared to non-military students and students

with military parents. Table 29 shows that 25.6% of students with military siblings are 7th

graders, while 37.5% are in the 11th grade.

Table 29. Sample Characteristics for Study #3 (n= 14,943) Total

N(%) No one in the

military (N=12,990)

%

Parent (N=1396)

%

Sibling (N=649)

%

Gender Female Male

7606 (51.7%) 7181 (48.6%)

51.5 48.5

51.1 48.9

50.9 49.1

Grade 7th 9th 11th

4588 (32.9%) 4908 (35.2%) 4446 (31.9%)

32.3 35.4 32.3

40.6 33.6 25.8

25.6 33.9 37.5

Race/Ethnicity Asian/AI/HI/AN Black White Mixed Race Hispanic

1189 (8.2%) 432 (3.0%) 3948 (27.3%) 1606 (11.1%) 7261 (50.3%)

7.9 2.5 27.3 10.3 52.0

12.1 7.2 25.6 18.1 36.9

7.1 4.0 31.7 12.3 44.8

Military Connection and Victimization

Since the research literature suggests that military and non-military students have

different social and emotional experiences in school, analyses were required to compare their

victimization rates. Detailed bivariate statistical analyses and in later sections, multivariate

analyses, were conducted to determine if there are different victimization rates among non-

 

124

military students, students with a military parent, and students with a military sibling. Table 30

shows that there is a significant association between overall victimization and military

connection (show chi-square). The highest rates of overall victimization occurred among

students with a military parent (77.1%), slightly higher than students with a military sibling

(75%) and non-military students (70.3%).

Analyses were then conducted to compare the rates of each form of victimization among

the three groups of students. As seen in Table 30, on all seven indicators of victimization,

students with military parents had the highest rates. Significant chi-square tests of association

also were found between military connection and all forms of victimization. About 39.2% of

students with a military parent and reported being shoved, pushed, slapped, hit or kicked, slightly

higher than students with a military sibling (32.3%) and non-military students (39.2%). Also,

students with military parents (14.4%) and reported higher rates of being threatened or injured

with a weapon (e.g. gun, knife, or club) than students with a military sibling (11.8%) and non-

military students (7.7%). Students with a military parent (28.2%) also reported higher rates of

being afraid of being beaten up than students with a military sibling (20.7%) and non-military

students (28.9%). In addition, about 33.7% of students with a military parent reported higher

rates of their property stolen or damaged, slightly higher than students with a military sibling

(29.8%) and non-military students (25.5%).

Table 30 also shows that students with a military parent experience higher rates of non-

physical victimization than students with a military sibling and non-military students. When

compared to non-military students (40.5%) and students with military sibling (43.4%), students

with military parents (46.3%) reported higher rates of having mean rumors or lies spread about

them. Similarly, students with a military parent (51.7%) also reported higher rates of being

 

125

victimized by sexual jokes, comments, or gestures than students with a military sibling (49.4%)

and non-military students (45.5%). About 47.1% of students with military parents reported the

highest rates of being made fun of because of your looks/way you talk, higher than students with

a military sibling (42.4%) and non-military students (37.6%).

Table 30. Victimization Rates by Military Connection Status (n=14,943) Total

(%) Not in the Military

(%) (n=12,990)

Parent (%)

(n=1,318)

Sibling (%)

(n=635)

In the past 12 months at school (Yes) Shoved, pushed, slapped, hit or kicked**

30.0

28.9

39.2

32.3

Afraid of being beaten up** 19.9 18.9 28.2 20.7 Had mean rumors or lies spread about you** 41.1 40.5 46.3 43.4 Sexual jokes, comments or gestures** 45.4 45.5 51.7 49.4 Made fun of because of your looks/way you talk**

38.6 37.6 47.1 40.2

Property stolen/deliberately damaged** 26.4 25.5 33.7 29.3 Mean rumors or lies on the Internet 21.9 21.0 28.2 26.0 Been threatened or injured with a weapon** 8.5 7.7 14.4 11.8 Victimization** 71.1 70.3 77.1 75.0 *Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p < .05 **Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p <.001

School Climate and Victimization in Overall Sample

In the next steps of analyses, bivariate and multivariate statistics were conducted to

evaluate relationships between school climate and victimization among students in military-

connected schools. Correlation analyses were first conducted to assess potential bivariate

associations between school climate and the composite victimization scale. These analyses

suggest that school climate plays a role in reducing rates of victimization. As seen in Table 31,

all school climate variables were significantly associated with victimization. Moderate negative

associations were found between belonging and victimization (r=-.17) and belonging and

relationships (r=-.12). In other words, greater degrees of belonging as well as relationships are

related to lower rates of victimization. In addition, table 31 shows that significant associations,

 

126

though weak, were detected between other school climate variables (safety, meaningful

participation, school awareness, and risky behavior approval) and victimization. While these are

weak associations, multivariate analyses later demonstrate that these components of school

climate play a significant role in decreasing the likelihood of being victimized in school.

Table 31. Correlational Analyses of School Climate, Deployment and Victimization 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1. Belonging -- .41** .24** .36** .07** .22** -.03** -.17**

2. Relationships .41** -- .08** .43** .19** .26** .02* -.12**

3. Safety .24** .08** -- .01 .03** .08** .01 -.06**

4. Meaningful Participation

.36** .43** .01 -- .14** .19** .02 -.04**

5. School Awareness

.07** .19** .03** .14** -- .13** .04** .07**

6. Risky Behavior

.22** .26** .08** .19** .13** -- .01 -.05**

7. Deployment -.03** -02* -.01 .02 .04** .01 -- .14**

8. Victimization -.17** -.12** .06** .04** .07** .05** .14** -- *Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p < .05 **Significant X2 for differences by military-connected status, p <.001

In order to examine the complexity of school climate’s relationship with victimization,

multivariate analyses were conducted. Logistic regression analyses provided detailed evaluations

of school climate and victimization, since these models control for other key variables present in

military-connected schools (i.e. military connection and experiencing the deployment of a family

member. Prior to conducting the logistic regression analyses, a multiple linear regression

analysis was performed to evaluate multicollinearity among the variables in this study. The

regression coefficients were all greater than 1, signifying that multicollinearity was not violated.

Table 32 shows results for the logistic regression of victimization by school climate. The

results suggest that a supportive school environment is associated with decreased victimization

 

127

rates. Significant associations were found between victimization and all components of school

climate, except risky behavior approval. As expected, belonging and caring relationships are

associated with decreased odds of victimization. An increasing level of belonging is associated

with a decreasing likelihood of victimization (OR = .80; 95% CI = .76-.85). In addition, an

increasing level of caring relationships is associated with a decreased likelihood of victimization

(OR = .83; 95% CI = .77-.88). Table 32 also shows that students who attend schools where they

feel unsafe and feel that students and teachers lack respect for their family background have

slightly higher rates of victimization. Lack of safety is associated with an increased likelihood of

victimization (OR = 1.15; 95% CI = 1.09-1.20). Lack of respect for family is associated with an

increasing likelihood of victimization (OR = 1.25; 95% CI = 1.19-1.31). Unexpectedly, table 32

shows that increasing levels of meaningful participation is associated with an increasing

likelihood of victimization (OR = 1.07; 95% CI = 1.01-1.13), however, this odds ratio suggest

only a 7% increased probability of being victimized.

Even though school climate was accounted for in this logistic regression (see Table 32),

military connection still remained a significant predictor of victimization. These results suggest

that the stressors that surround a student who has a military parent or sibling lead to victimization

even when they attend schools with supportive school climates. As seen in table 32, controlling

for the effects of school climate, significant associations were found between demographics and

victimization. Table 32 indicates that having a parent in the military still plays a significant role

in being victimized. When compared to non-military students, students with a military parent are

27% more likely than non-military students to be victimized (OR=1.27; 95% CI = 1.08-1.49).

Also, while the result is not significant, having a military sibling is still associated with a 16%

increased odds of being victimized (OR=1.16; 95% CI=.93-1.44).

 

128

Notably, other demographic characteristics are also significant predictors of

victimization. With regards to gender, table 32 shows that male students are 35% less likely than

female students to be victimized in a school setting (OR = .65; 95% CI = .59-.70). In addition, in

reference to race/ethnicity Hispanic students are less likely to experience victimization than

white students (OR = .68; 95% CI = .61-.75). Moreover, grade level still plays a role in

predicting victimization, controlling for school climate. When compared to 7th graders, 9th

graders and 11th graders are less likely to be victimized (OR = .70; 95% CI =.70-.88, OR = .60;

95% CI = .53-.66, respectively).

Table 32. Logistic Regressions of Victimization by Demographics and School Climate (n=14,943) Predictors Victimization

OR (95% CI) Constant Grade 7th 9th 11th

5.07** 1.00 .79** (.70-.88) .60** (.53-.66)

Gender Female (reference) Male

1.00 .65** (.59-.70)

Race/Ethnicity White (reference) Asian/AI/AN/PI/HI Black Mixed Hispanic

1.00 .93 (.78-1.10) 1.01 (.77-1.38) .99 (.84-1.16) .68** (.61-.75)  

Military-Connection None (reference) Parent Sibling

1.00 1.27* (1.08-1.49) 1.16 (.93-1.44)

(Table 32 continued)

 

129

(Table 32 continued) School Climate Belonging Relationships Safety Meaningful Part. Respect for Family Risky Behavior

.80** (.76-.85) .83** (.77-.88) 1.15** (1.09-1.20) 1.07* (1.01-1.13) 1.25** (1.19-1.31) .94 (.87-1.01)

Model Evaluation % Correctly Predicted -2 Log Likelihood Cox & Snell R2

Nagelkerke R2

Block X2 (df) Model X2 (df) Goodness of fit Homer/Lemeshow

72.2% 11990.58 .04 .06 448.39 (15) 448.39 (15) 15.14

Deployment, School Climate, and Victimization

In the next series of analyses, I accounted for another key variable unique to military-

connected schools, the experience of a family member’s deployment. A substantial literature

base identifies the deployment cycle as the most significant military stressor affecting the

schooling experiences (i.e. victimization) of students in military-connected schools. Hence, a

logistic regression was conducted to assess the effects of single and multiple deployments on

victimization, also accounting for the effects of school climate. As seen in Table 33, significant

associations between single and multiple deployments and victimization, even after controlling

for school climate, provide more evidence of the persisting effects of deployment on

victimization despite the experience of being in a supportive school. Table 33 shows that odds

ratios for multiple deployments are slightly larger than odds ratios for single deployments. A

single deployment is associated with an increasing likelihood of being victimized in the school

context (OR = 1.56; 95% CI = 1.31-1.86). Experiencing multiple deployments (2 or more) is

associated with a 60% increase in odds of being victimized (OR = 1.60; 95% CI = 1.40-1.84).

 

130

However, despite the experience of deployment, the results in Table 33 suggest that

school climate plays a significant role in likelihood of victimization. Table 33 indicates that all

components of school climate, except for risky behavior approval, are significantly associated

with victimization. An increasing level of belonging is associated with a decreased likelihood of

being victimized (OR = .79; 95% CI = .75-.85), while a higher degree of caring relationships is

associated with a decreased likelihood of being victimized (OR = .83; 95% CI = .77-.89). A

lower sense of safety is associated with an increased likelihood of being victimized (OR = 1.14;

95% CI = 1.09-1.20), while a lack of respect for family is associated with a 25% increase in odds

of being victimized in school (OR = 1.25; 95% CI = 1.18-1.32). Unexpectedly, an increasing

level meaningful participation is associated with increased likelihood of being victimized (OR =

1.08; 95% CI = 1.01-1.15).

Table 33. Logistic Regressions of Victimization by Demographics, Deployment, and School Climate (n=14,943) Predictors Victimization

OR (95% CI) Constant Grade 7th 9th 11th

4.45** 1.00 .79** (.70-.90) .62** (.55-.70)

Gender Female (reference) Male

1.00 .65**(.59-.71)

Race/Ethnicity White (reference) Asian/AI/AN/PI/HI Black Mixed Hispanic

1.00 .88 (.72-1.06) .97 (.71-1.32) .98 (.82-1.16) .68** (.61-.76)

(Table 33 continued)

 

131

(Table 33 continued) Deployment None (reference) One Two or more

1.00 1.56** (1.31-1.86) 1.60** (1.40-1.84)

School Climate Belonging Relationships Safety Meaningful Part. Respect for Family Risky Behavior

.79** (.75-.85) .83** (.77-.89) 1.14** (1.09-1.20) 1.08* (1.01-1.15) 1.25** (1.18-1.32) .96 (.88-1.04)

Model Evaluation % Correctly Predicted -2 Log Likelihood Cox & Snell R2

Nagelkerke R2

Block X2 (df) Model X2 (df) Goodness of fit Homer/Lemeshow

71.9% 10150.50 .05 .07 440.52 (15) 440.52 (15) 9.83

School Climate and Victimization among Military and Non-Military Students

As previously discussed in the section on bivariate analyses, multivariate analyses were

conducted to assess different victimization rates among non-military students, students who have

a military parent, and students who have a sibling in the military. As seen in Table 34, logistic

regression models of victimization by school climate were constructed in three subsamples.

These analyses made it possible to compare the potentially different effects of school climate on

victimization on each subsample of students. Contrary to expectations, the effects of belonging

on victimization are similar in magnitude in all three groups of students. In the case of belonging,

an increasing level of belonging is associated with a 21% decreased probability of being

victimized (OR=.79; 95% CI=.74-.85) in non-military students. Among students with a military

parent, the odds ratio for belonging is non-significant, yet similar to non-military students, an

increasing level of belonging is associated with a 13% decreased odds of being victimized

 

132

(OR=.87; 95% CI =.70-1.08). Among students with a military sibling, the odds ratio for

belonging is also non-significant, however, the odds ratio is similar to non-military students and

students with a military parent (OR=.86; 95% CI=.63-1.16).

Among non-military students, there is a slightly weaker effect of caring relationships on

victimization among military students (students with a military parent and students with a

military sibling) when compared to non-military students. An increasing degree of caring

relationships is associated with 27% decreased odds of victimization (OR=.73; 95% CI=.50-

1.07) among students with a military sibling and a 34% decreased odds of victimization

(OR=.66; 95% CI=.50-.86) among students with a military parent. However, among non-military

students, an increasing degree of caring relationships is associated with a 15% decreased odds of

victimization (OR=.85; 95% CI=.79-.92).

The effect of safety on victimization is similar in magnitude across the three groups of

students. Among non-military students, lack of safety is associated with a 14% increased

likelihood of victimization (OR=1.14; 95% CI = 1.0. Lack of safety is also associated with a

20% increased likelihood of victimization among students with a military parent (OR=1.20 95%

CI = 1.01-1.41). Although the odds ratio was non-significant, lack of safety is also associated

with a 18% increased likelihood of victimization among students with a military sibling

(OR=1.18; 95% CI = .91-1.53). The effect of respect for family on victimization is also similar

in magnitude across the three groups of students. As seen in Table 34, lack of respect for family

is associated with a 25% increased likelihood of victimization for non-military students

(OR=1.25; 95% CI = 1.19-1.32), a 22% increased likelihood of victimization for students with a

military parent (OR=1.22; 95% CI = 1.01-1.48), and a 30% increased likelihood of victimization

for students with a military sibling (OR=1.30; 95% CI = .99-1.70).

 

133

Table 34. Logistic Regressions of Victimization by School Climate (n=14,943) Predictors Non-Military

OR (95% CI) Military Parent

OR (95% CI) Military Sibling

OR (95% CI) Constant Grade 7th 9th 11th

4.53** 1.00 .81** (.71-.93) .62** (.54-.70)

2.40 1.00 .78 (.52-1.17) .82 (.54-1.26)

12.99** 1.00 .45* (.21-.96) .31** (.15-.64)

Gender Female (reference) Male

1.00 .64** (.58-.71)

1.00 .65* (.46-.90)

1.00 .69 (.42-1.13)

Race/Ethnicity White (reference) Asian/AI/AN/PI/HI Black Mixed Hispanic

1.00 .89 (.72-1.10) .98 (.68-1.43) .96 (.79-1.16) .65** (.58-.74)

1.00 1.09 (.63-1.90) 1.18 (.61-2.29) 1.26 (.77-2.07) 1.37 (.89-2.10)

1.00 .41 (.15-1.09) 1.14 (.29-4.40) 1.00 (.45-2.20) .49 (.28-.88)

Deployment None One Two or more

1.00 1.62** (1.32-1.99) 1.59** (1.32-1.91)

1.00 1.73* (1.01-3.00) 1.92* (1.27-2.91)

1.00 1.44 (.77-2.69) 1.63 (.94-2.81)

School Climate Belonging Relationships Safety Meaningful Part. Respect for Family Risky Behavior

.79** (.74-.85) .85** (.79-.92) 1.14** (1.07-1.20) 1.07 (.1.00-1.15) 1.25** (1.19-1.32) .96 (.88-1.05)

.87 (.70-1.08) .66* (.50-.86) 1.20* (1.01-1.41) 1.13 (.90-1.42) 1.22* (1.01-1.48) 1.02 (.76-1.35)

.86 (.63-1.16) .73 (.50-1.07) 1.18 (.91-1.53) 1.10 (.79-1.53) 1.30 (.99-1.70) .76 (.49-1.18)

Model Evaluation % Correctly Predicted -2 Log Likelihood Cox & Snell R2

Nagelkerke R2

Block X2 (df) Model X2 (df) Goodness of fit Homer/Lemeshow

71.3% 8823.12 .05 .07 368.29 (15) 368.29 (15) 9.72

77.8% 881.84 .05 .07 43.02 (15) 43.02 (15) 4.32

75.6% 417.52 .08 .12 35.11 (15) 35.11 (15) 13.33

School-Level Effects

Additional analyses were conducted to address the aim of assessing the effects of school-

level factors on victimization. Contrary to expectations, there were no significant associations

detected between military concentration and each form of victimization. In addition, analyses

 

134

assessing the role of school academic achievement and school poverty level found no significant

effects on victimization.

Discussion

Utilizing a population sample of secondary students in eight military connected school

districts, this study assesses victimization rates among students by military connection (non-

military students, students with a military parent, and students with a military sibling).

Associations between multiple components of school climate and victimization among military

and non-military students were also examined. In addition, relationships between deployment

and victimization are also evaluated. The results of this study indicate that multiple components

of school climate reduce the likelihood of being victimized, even when accounting for students’

experiences with the deployment of a family member. In addition, multivariate analyses indicate

that the magnitude of associations between school climate and victimization are similar among

non-military students, students with a military parent, and students with a military sibling.

Victimization Rates by Military Connection

The bivariate analyses in this study show that students with a military parent have higher

rates of victimization than students with a military sibling and non-military students. This finding

supports a recent epidemiological study that found that adolescents with a military parent have

higher rates of risky behaviors, including violent behavior, than non-military students. Reed and

colleagues (2011) found that adolescent boys with at least one parent in the military are at

elevated risk of engaging in physical fighting, carrying a weapon, and joining a gang.

These findings suggest that compared to civilian secondary students, secondary students

with a military parent are targets of non-physical and physical victimization in civilian public

schools. One explanation may be that civilian peers and school staff lack awareness and

 

135

sensitivity to the military-specific challenges of military children, and in turn, how these

challenges are manifested in social, emotional, and behavioral problems in school. Studies have

found that military children experience unique stressors stemming from military-specific life

events (i.e. deployment, reintegration, veterans’ war trauma) and as a result, often have

psychological challenges as well as academic and social functioning issues at school (Chandra et

al., 2010; Chartrand & Seigel, 2007; Hoshmand & Hoshmand, 2007; Huebner et al., 2009;

Jordan et al., 1992; Rosenheck & Nathan, 1986; Solomon, 1988). One significant military

stressor is multiple school transitions. Studies have found that military children cope with more

school transitions than civilian children and constantly readjust to new school and community

contexts (Bradshaw et al., 2010). Furthermore, qualitative studies have suggested that some

civilian school environments lack the knowledge and resources to facilitate healthy school

transitions and respond to parental deployment (e.g. excused absences) (Chandra et al., 2010:

Mmari et al., 2009). In some cases, a recent study found that civilian peers ridicule and

physically victimize military children (Mmari et al., 2009).

School Climate and Victimization

The findings in this study suggest that a supportive school environment can reduce the

probability of being victimized. Unlike previous studies, this study provides multiple constructs

to represent school climate—belonging, caring relationships, meaningful participation, risky

behavior disapproval, and safety. Multiple components of school climate, including belonging,

caring relationships, and safety, were significantly related to victimization.

Not surprisingly, this study indicates that caring relationships had significant associations

with victimization. This finding supports research that has linked caring-teacher relationships

with the reduced probability of physical and non-physical victimization. When students perceive

 

136

that teachers and other adults are providing consistent social and emotional support, students are

more likely to adopt positive attitudes about seeking help from school staff for bullying and

threats of violence among peers (Elliot et al., 2010). Caring teacher-student relationships also

help facilitate active student engagement in monitoring and reporting school violence

(Brookover, Schweitzer, Scheider, & Beady, 1978; Hoy & Hunnum, 1997). This study also

found a significant association between belonging and victimization. This finding suggests that

when students feel more connected to and/or less alienated from a school community, they are

less likely to be victimized by peers.

In addition to caring-relationships, respect for student’s family background played a

significant role in reducing the likelihood of victimization. This finding provides empirical

evidence for a large body of theoretical work on culturally responsive schooling. These theorists

posit that teachers and other school staff and peers need to be more knowledgeable of the unique

cultural and family backgrounds of minority students to ensure more positive social and

emotional outcomes in school (Hernandez-Sheets, 2003 and 2009; Ladson-Billings, 1994). In

culturally-responsive schools, peers, teachers, and other school adults are aware of the unique

family and cultural backgrounds of students, and hence can alter school and classroom

environments to address their unique needs (Ladson-Billings, 1994). In the case of military

children, this may include adding military families to curriculum (i.e. history lessons), creating

bulletin boards and other visual displays to spotlight deployed family members, assemblies, and

transition rooms (De Pedro et al., 2011).

Unexpectedly, this study found a weak association between meaningful participation and

victimization. This finding challenges theoretical work and empirical studies on school climate,

which assumes that a high level of school engagement is associated with academic success and a

 

137

reduced probability of victimization (Brookover et al., 1978; Hoy & Hunnum, 1997). However,

this body of literature does not account for other components of school climate, which was

accomplished in this study. This suggests that belonging, caring relationships, safety, and respect

for student’s family and cultural background may be more significant elements of school climate

with regards to victimization. In addition, this study found no association between risky behavior

disapproval and victimization. This finding challenges studies that have found lower rates of

school violence when schools utilize interventions for adopting an anti-drug and substance abuse

culture.

Deployment and Victimization

The findings indicated that single and multiple deployments were significantly associated

with victimization. As expected, the findings also indicate that the probability of being

victimized in school becomes greater when students experience multiple deployments. These

findings support recent research where the experience of a parental deployment was a significant

predictor of school violence perpetration and victimization (Reed et al., 2011). There is a clear

need for theoretical frameworks explaining the association between deployment and school

victimization. It is possible that the psychological strain of deployment may have a direct

influence on the behavior of military children and adolescents. Research has found that military

children and adolescents exhibit elevated externalizing behaviors and aggression in the

household and school contexts, hence attracting opportunities to be victimized (Flake et al.,

2009). In addition, military adolescents have had multiple school transitions through elementary

and secondary schools (Bradshaw et al., 2010). Hence, students may be more likely to victimize

military children, who are often newcomers in a school community. This finding may also

suggest that the emotional and psychological strain of prolonged and multiple deployments may

 

138

weaken the resiliency of children and adolescents with deployed family members, making them

vulnerable to victimization. More research is necessary to explain how and why having a

deployed parent can be related to being victimized or engaged with violent behaviors at school.

Another significant finding is that school climate still plays a significant role in reducing

victimization rates, even accounting for deployment. In fact, the odds ratios between each school

climate component and victimization in the deployment model (see Table 33) are similar to the

odds ratios in the non-deployment model (Table 32). This finding supports theoretical work and

empirical studies that have found a supportive school environment significantly reduces the

likelihood of victimization, even among at-risk and high-stress student populations (Astor,

Meyer, & Behre, 1999).

School Climate and Victimization among Military and Non-Military Students

Detailed analyses of the relationships between multiple components of school climate

and victimization within subsamples of non-military students, students with a military parent and

students with a military sibling were conducted in this study. A recent study provided normative

rates comparing the school violence and victimization rates of military-connected and civilian

youth (Reed et al., 2011). To date, there have been no studies that have compared associations

between school climate and victimization between different demographic groups. Given the

distinct stressors that military adolescents experience, it is notable that a supportive school

environment (belonging, caring relationships, safety, meaningful participation, and respect for

family and cultural background) can influence victimization of military-connected adolescents

similarly to non-military students. It is possible that school staff and students in military-

connected schools are attuned to the challenges of military life due to their proximity to military

installations and exposure to military students and their culture. Daily experiences with military

 

139

culture may have enhanced the awareness of school staff and peers to respond to the needs of

military children in culturally sensitive ways. Future empirical investigations can focus on a

school’s awareness of military culture and its impact on the victimization and violence rates of

military children.

Unique to this study are comparative multivariate analyses of school climate and

victimization among three groups of students, non-military students, students with a military

parent and students with a military sibling. There is a growing body of research on the emotional

and psychological outcomes of military children and adolescents; only one study has directly

assessed the outcomes of students with a military sibling (Rodriguez & Margolin, 2011).

Rodriguez and Margolin (2011) found that adolescents have unique social and emotional

challenges when a sibling is deployed, stemming from parental stress and social alienation and

the disruption of a sibling bond. More research is needed to further examine how other school

environmental factors (in addition to school climate) can help promote positive social and

emotional outcomes among students with siblings serving in the military.

Summary

Overall, the results of this study show that there are significant relationships between

school climate and victimization. These relationships are still significant, even accounting for

single and multiple deployments. This study also indicates that students with a military parent

had higher rates of physical and non-physical victimization. Detailed multivariate analyses show

that associations between school climate and victimization are similar in magnitude among

military-connected students (students with a military parent, students with a military sibling) and

non-military students. In addition, this study presents the first quantitative study, to date,

examining relationships between school climate and victimization among students with a

 

140

military sibling. The overall results provide further evidence that future theories, educational

policies, and school-based interventions be focused on enhancing the social and emotional

climate of military-connected school environments.

Limitations

There are a few limitations in this study that are worthy noting before generalizing these

findings to school climate interventions in military-connected schools. First, due to the cross-

sectional nature of this study, cause and effect relationships could not be assessed. Future studies

utilizing longitudinal data can be conducted to determine if school climate has a causal

relationship with victimization among military and non-military students. Second, this study

examined associations between school-level factors and victimization, and no significant

relationships were found. Academic achievement and poverty indicators were school-level

variables, assigned to all sampled students within a school. Future empirical work would need to

include student-level academic achievement and poverty data, to ensure that variation among

students within a school can be more accurately represented.

Implications

The findings from this study provide a detailed understanding of school climate and

victimization in military-connected schools. A large number of studies have found school

climate can reduce rates of school violence and student victimization in different contexts. This

is the first empirical investigation of school climate and victimization in military-connected

schools. Future studies are needed to understand this relationship among military and non-

military student populations in other military-connected school and district contexts. These

studies would require the use of a theoretically-driven model of school climate to determine

detailed analyses concerning caring relationships, belonging, family respect, safety, and risky

 

141

behavior disapproval. More importantly, these multivariate analyses would need to account for

military-specific stressors such as deployment and school transitions.

The findings in this study provide further support for including school climate in current

state accountability systems. Schools are embedded in a high stakes accountability context (e.g.

No Child Left Behind) intended to leverage the academic achievement of traditionally

underserved and historically low achieving minority groups (Cohen et al., 2010; Cochran-Smith,

2005). In a survey of state school climate policies, Cohen and colleagues (2010) found that

school climate improvement and social and emotional skill building are excluded from general

state accountability systems in most U.S. states, leaving it up to schools to voluntarily pursue

climate issues. This policy context stands in conflict with a large body of educational research

linking supportive school environments with reduced rates of bullying and victimization and

links between positive social and emotional outcomes with academic achievement (Cohen et al.,

2011). The results of this study provide more support for a growing research agenda outlining the

relevance of social and emotional outcomes (i.e. victimization and violence) to the current

educational policy trend of improving academic outcomes among minority and at-risk student

populations.

In summary, this study fills gaps in the military-connected school and school climate

literatures and has implications for future research, theory, and educational practice. Future

studies are needed to investigate how multiple components of school climate reduce rates of

victimization among military and non-military students, in civilian public schools. Studies with

longitudinal research designs are needed to understand the cause and effect relationships between

multiple components of school climate and victimization. Further, qualitative studies are needed

to understand how teachers and other school staff in military-connected schools create

 

142

supportive, military culture-friendly environments. These studies can help generate effective

local school climate practices and strategies specific to military children.

 

143

Chapter Five:

Integration and Implementation of Findings from Three Studies

Purpose of the Studies

Research and theoretical work conducted across academic disciplines has found that a

supportive and caring school climate can promote positive academic, social and emotional, and

psychological outcomes among students (Brand, Feldner, Shim, Seitsinger, & Dumas, 2003;

Cohen, McCabe, Michelli, & Pickeral, 2009; Zullig, Koopman, Patton, & Ubbes, 2010). In

particular, these studies have found that a supportive school climate can promote well-being and

curb victimization and negative mental health outcomes (i.e. depression, suicidal ideation)

among students from different geographic and cultural contexts, even among students

experiencing psychological strain in their households and neighborhoods (Hoy & Hunnum,

1997; Jia, Way, Ling, Yoshikawa, Chen, Hughes, Ke & Lu, 2009; Modin & Ostberg, 2009).

Recent reviews in educational research have generated theoretically driven models that

incorporate multiple components of school climate (Cohen et al., 2009; Zullig et al., 2010).

These components include belonging, caring relationships, safety, and respect for a student’s

family background, meaningful participation, and risky behavior disapproval. To date, empirical

studies have not yet utilized conceptual models and measures incorporating these components of

school climate.

Researchers have not yet examined the role of a supportive and caring school climate on

the social and emotional outcomes of military students. This is surprising given the long wars in

Iraq and Afghanistan and the significant presence of military students in civilian public school

districts throughout the United States. According to the Department of Defense Educational

Activity (DoDEA), since 2002, over 2 million children have experienced a parental deployment.

 

144

Presently, there are an estimated 1.2 million school-aged military children, while another

625,000 of National Guard, and 705,000 children of Reserve members attend civilian public

schools. In addition, 214 civilian public school districts are comprised of a significant minority

of military students (about 400 or more than 4% of total student enrolment) (Kitmitto et al.,

2011).

A large number of studies have found that military children experience military life

stressors that could potentially impact their social and academic functioning in schools

(Chartrand and Seigel, 2007; Hoshmand & Hoshmand, 2007; Huebner, Mancini, Bowen, &

Orthner, 2009). During periods of deployment, studies have found adolescents adopt more

household roles and responsibilities, cope with the fear of a family member’s death or injury, and

are exposed to the stress and anxiety of a left-behind parent (Faber, Willerton, Clymer,

MacDermid, & Weiss, 2008; Huebner et al., 2007). In the reintegration periods, military

adolescents cope with re-establishing relationships with a deployed parent and in some cases, are

exposed to the physical and psychological war trauma of a returning veteran (Faber, Willerton,

Clymer, MacDermid, & Weiss, 2008; Huebner et al., 2007). In addition, DoDEA reports that

military students encounter multiple residential relocations and school transitions. Typically,

military students have on average nine school transitions throughout the course of their

elementary and secondary schooling. In addition, military students are three times as likely as

civilian students to experience a school transition. Despite these stressful experiences and

concerning outcomes, recent studies have found that supportive communities (i.e. military bases,

military-impacted neighborhoods) with easy access to military-specific health care and other

social services can help promote strategies among military children and adolescents to cope with

 

145

the stressors of deployment (Flake, Davis, Johnson, & Middleton, 2009; Hoshmand &

Hoshmand, 2007).

Recent studies have examined the social and emotional experiences of military students

in civilian operated schools. On one hand, these studies have uncovered localized attempts by

school staff to make school environments more welcoming and caring of military students. Some

school staff at military-connected schools have developed homegrown practices (i.e. clubs

geared to military students, displays and bulletin boards highlighting deployed parents) to

facilitate the belongingness of military students. However, on the other hand, these same studies

have highlighted how some school staff have struggled with responding to the social and

emotional challenges of military students (Bradshaw et al., 2010; Chandra et al., 2010; Mmari et

al., 2009). School staff often lack awareness surrounding military life events, evidence-based

strategies to address temporary separation from a deployed parent or sibling, and school-wide

procedures for facilitating easy school transitions. The preceding studies have begun to fill in the

current gap in our knowledge on the role of a supportive school climate in promoting positive

social and emotional outcomes among military children. However, these studies utilized small

samples and did not incorporate theoretically-driven conceptual models of school climate.

Hence, findings from these studies do not provide results concerning the role of school climate in

promoting positive social and emotional outcomes among military students.

So far, large gaps in our current knowledge of school climate and military-connected

schools still exist. To date, no studies have examined how school climate could promote well-

being and curb victimization and negative mental health outcomes among military adolescents. It

is also not yet known if military students have, in fact, more negative school climate perceptions

than non-military students. In addition, it is not known if school climate plays a role in

 

146

promoting well-being, curbing rates of negative mental health outcomes and victimization

among military and non-military students in military-connected schools. Knowledge from these

studies would expand research on school climate and military-connected schools.

This multiple manuscript dissertation addresses the current gaps in research. This

dissertation first compares the school climate perceptions of military and non-military students

enrolled in the same schools. Components of school climate, which include belonging, caring

relationships, meaningful participation, safety, risky behavior disapproval, and respect for family

and cultural background are assessed among non-military students, students with a military

parent, and students with a military sibling. Next, this dissertation investigates associations

between school climate and mental health (i.e. well-being, depression, and suicidal ideation),

accounting for the experience of deployment. More detailed multivariate analyses are conducted

to determine if relationships between school climate and mental health are different among

military and non-military students. Last, this dissertation examines relationships between school

climate and victimization, accounting for the experience of deployment. Further multivariate

analyses are performed to assess whether the relationship between school climate and

victimization is different for military and non-military students. This study utilizes a population

sample of 7th, 9th, and 11th graders in eight military-connected school district and unlike previous

studies, utilizes a theoretically-driven model of school climate. The major findings of this study

and implications for school reform, policy, and recommendations for future research are

discussed in this chapter.

 

147

Overall Findings and Links to Current Research on School Climate and Military-

Connected Schools

School Climate Perceptions in Military-Connected Schools

Study 1 of this dissertation provided detailed analyses of school climate perceptions

among non-military students, students with a military parent, and students with a military sibling.

This study examined students’ perceptions of multiple components of school climate—

belonging, caring relationships, safety, meaningful participation, respect for a student’s family,

and risky behavior disapproval. One important finding is that within the same schools military-

connected students had more negative perceptions of each component of school climate than

non-military students. This finding supports existing research on military-connected schools.

These studies have found that military-connected students experience social and emotional

challenges in their school environments, stemming from military life events (i.e. deployment)

(Bradshaw et al., 2010; Chandra et al., 2010; Mmari et al., 2009). This finding also suggests that

school staff in civilian public schools may lack awareness and strategies for responding to the

social and emotional challenges of military children.

While military students consistently reported more negative school climate perceptions,

the differences between military and non-military were small (less than 5% percent difference).

This finding suggests that while some military students may have negative social and emotional

experiences of their school environments, there may also be a sizeable proportion of resilient

military students who have positive experiences of their school environments. In addition, there

may also be a significant proportion of non-military students in the same schools who have

negative experiences of their school environments. This finding also uncovers a limitation in

recent studies on military-connected schools and military students. These studies utilized

 

148

purposive samples of military students and examined their social and emotional challenges of

military students, while ignoring the potential challenges of non-military students in the same

schools (Bradshaw et al., 2010; Chandra et al., 2010; Mmari et al., 2009. The authors’ exclusive

investigation of the social and emotional challenges of military-connected students, but not their

social and emotional strengths, supports a current assumption by researchers and practitioners

that military children have negative outcomes.

School Climate and Mental Health among Military and Non-Military Students

Study 2 of this dissertation provided multivariate analyses examining the role of school

climate in the well-being, depression and suicidal ideation rates of military and non-military

students in the same schools. One important finding in this study is that there are differences in

the mental health outcomes of students with military parent and students with a military sibling.

Most previous empirical studies have focused on the psychological outcomes and experiences of

children with a military parent. To date, only one published study has focused on the experiences

of adolescents or children with a military sibling (Rodriguez & Margolin, 2011). Rodriguez &

Margolin (2011) found that adolescents with a military sibling have unique military-related

stressors, such as coping with the repeated and prolonged separation from a sibling, the

emotional distress of left-behind parents, and alienation from social supports. Future studies need

to analyze the mental health outcomes of adolescents with a military sibling and adolescents with

a military parent and assess potential differences.

Results from this study also indicated that a supportive and nurturing school climate may

benefit the mental health outcomes of all students. This study is the only known empirical

investigation to show that school climate has an impact on the mental health outcomes of

students in military-connected schools. For all students in this study, caring relationships and

 

149

belonging played a major role in all three indicators of mental health (well-being, depression,

and suicidal ideation) among students in military-connected schools. This finding supports

research and theoretical work on the protective roles that support from teachers and other school

adults and belonging play in the mental health outcomes of students in different school contexts

(Cohen et al., 2009; Zullig et al., 2010).

Unexpectedly, school safety played a small role in promoting positive mental health

outcomes and reducing negative mental health outcomes among students in this study. This

finding challenges numerous studies that have found that a perception of school order can serve

as significant protective factors for internalizing and externalizing behavioral and mental health

problems among middle and high school students (Kuperminc, Leadbeater, & Blatt, 2001). This

finding also challenges the current emphasis among schools that focus exclusively on school

safety interventions as a means to improve the overall school’s climate. Future studies need to

continue evaluating the role that school safety play in mental health and risky behaviors, while

also accounting for other components of school climate.

Results in this study further indicated that school climate had a significant impact on the

mental health outcomes of military students to the same extent as non-military students. For both

military and non-military students, the most significant components of school climate were

caring relationships and belonging. Both components promoted well-being and reduced rates of

depression and suicidal ideation. These findings suggest that school climate interventions

designed to address the mental health outcomes of non-military students may also be beneficial

to the mental health of military students. In the same vein, school climate interventions tailored

to the unique challenges of military life (i.e. transition rooms and centers) may also promote

well-being among non-military students. These results challenges research on military students

 

150

and military-connected schools (Bradshaw et al., 2010; Chandra et al., 2010; Mmari et al., 2009).

These studies explored the social and emotional supports of civilian public school environments,

yet concluded that they did not significantly affect the mental health issues of students from

military families.

The findings of this study also indicated that school climate even plays an important role

in the mental health outcomes of students experiencing the stress of a family member’s

deployment. These results support recent empirical and theoretical work showing that supportive

and responsive schools have a protective effect on the mental health outcomes of students,

experiencing psychological strain (Astor et al., 2011). Astor and colleauges (2011) found that

teachers, principals, school psychologists, counselors, and other school staff utilized a data-

driven decision making procedure to identify students with post-trauma symptoms in the

aftermath war. This process enabled teachers and other school staff to develop more caring

relationships between teachers and students. In addition, this process helped prevent the

academic failure and disengagement of students diagnosed with post-trauma symptoms by

avoiding mislabeling and placement in special education and other inappropriate academic and

behavioral intervention programs.

Victimization in Military-Connected Schools

Study 2 of this dissertation examined the role of school climate in the victimization of

students in military-connected schools. One important finding is that military-connected

students, especially students with a military parent, had consistently higher rates of victimization,

when compared to non-military students. These findings support a recent epidemiological that

found that students who have a parent serving in the military engage in violent behaviors in

 

151

schools and are physically and non-physically victimized to a greater extent than their civilian

peers (Reed, Bell, & Edwards, 2011).

Findings from recent qualitative studies may provide some explanation for the higher

rates of victimization and violence of military students. These studies suggested that lack of

awareness and support by schools staff and peers contribute to military students being more

vulnerable to becoming victims of non-physical and physical acts of violence. Mmari and

colleagues (2010) found that anti-war sentiments provided impetus for civilian students to

commit acts of violence against military adolescents. Also, military students had difficulty

making friends and developing caring and nurturing relationships at school due to teachers’ and

peers’ lack of awareness of military life and culture. In addition, military students cope with

multiple school transitions and must constantly adjust to new school environments, including

school and classroom rules and procedures (Bradshaw et al., 2010). Often military-connected

school environments lack appropriate transition supports and procedures, and hence, lead to

academic issues and social challenges with peers.

Similar to Study 2’s results on mental health outcomes, Study 3 also indicated that there

are differences between students with a military parent and students with a military sibling with

regard to victimization rates. Consistently, on almost every item, students with a military parent

had slightly higher rates of being victimized at school. This finding provides researchers with

more evidence that having a parent in the military and having a sibling in the military are

qualitatively different experiences that lead to different outcomes. Students with a military parent

may be dealing with multiple and prolonged parental separation, adopting household roles and

responsibilities typically reserved for adults, and in some cases, a veteran parents physical or

psychological trauma. While some military children and adolescents develop resilience from the

 

152

stressors of having a military parent, other military students may develop externalizing

behaviors. Future empirical studies need to examine the risky behavior outcomes of students

with parents serving in the military and students with siblings serving in the military as separate

groups. Moreover, future empirical studies need to develop explanations for why outcomes may

be different for students who have a military parent and students who have a military sibling.

In addition, this is one of the first empirical studies to assess the role of school climate in

the victimization of students attending military-connected schools. Results from this study

indicate that secondary students in military-connected schools are victimized less frequently

when they are in a supportive and caring school environment. Several findings add to current

research linking school climate to violence and victimization. Similar to Study 2’s findings, it is

the dimensions of belonging and caring relationships played the most important role in reducing

victimization among all students in this study. This finding supports research on the role of

teachers’ social and emotional support and belonging in promoting pro-social behaviors and

conflict resolution skills (Bond, Butler, Thomas, Carlin, Glover, Bowes, & Patton, 2007; Wilson,

2004; Bonny, Britto, Klostermann, Hornung, & Slap, 2000).

Also, as expected, a lack of safety increased victimization. This supports a substantial

literature on school safety and violence, which has found that unsafe schools where school

violence rules and procedures are not commonly understood by school staff and students are

characterized by high rates of both physical and non-physical victimization (Marachi, Astor, &

Benbenishty, 2006; Wang, 2009). In addition, unique to this study, lack of respect for a student’s

family background played a substantial role in reducing victimization in military-connected

schools. This finding provides empirical support for theoretical work on culturally responsive

schooling (Hernandez-Sheets, 2003 and 2009; Ladson-Billings, 1994). This area of research has

 

153

found that schools prevent disengagement of minority students when teachers and peers are

aware of their family dynamics and cultural issues.

This is also one of the first empirical studies that compares the degree to which school

climate impacts victimization among non-military students, students with a military parent, and

students with a military sibling. For all three groups of students, belonging, safety, respect for

student’s family background played major roles in reducing victimization. Also, while caring

relationships also played a significant role in the victimization outcomes of all three groups of

students, the impact is slightly larger among students with a military parent. These findings

support past research, which indicates that a supportive and responsive school climate has a

significant impact on different groups of students by race, ethnicity, gender, and other cultural

identities (i.e. military connection) (Cohen et al., 2009; Zullig et al., 2009). In addition, this study

also shows that school climate plays a significant role in reducing victimization even when

students are experiencing the stress of a family member’s deployment. Findings from Study 3

indicate that multiple components of school climate, especially caring relationships, belonging,

and respect for a student’s family background, may lead to less violent schools even when

students are psychologically impacted by deployment.

Implications for Future Educational Reform and Practice

Research conducted in this dissertation is positioned within the context of a research

agenda that seeks to examine the role that supportive schools play in the social, emotional and

academic outcomes of military-connected students. As seen in Figure 1, De Pedro and colleagues

(2011) found that the bulk of research studies on military children and adolescents have focused

on risk issues related to military life events (i.e. deployment), psychological and social supports

in the family and community, and their social, emotional and psychological development. As

 

154

seen in the right hand of Figure 1, future research on military children needs to focus on how

factors within the school environment such as principal leadership, peer and teacher awareness

and support, and a supportive school climate can influence the social, emotional and academic

outcomes of military children. The studies in this dissertation specifically examined the role that

a supportive school climate plays in key social and emotional outcomes known to impact

academic functioning—mental health and victimization. In order to more accurately assess how

school climate influences the mental health and victimization outcomes of military-connected

students, this dissertation utilizes a conceptualization of school climate, driven by decades of

theoretical and empirical work. This model is comprised of multiple components, including

belonging, caring relationships, meaningful participation, safety, respect for a student’s family,

and risky behavioral disapproval.

Findings from this dissertation begin to fill in the knowledge gap on the role of

supportive school environments in the social and emotional outcomes of military-connected

students. These studies suggest that a supportive school climate plays a significant role in the

social and emotional outcomes of military-connected students, specifically promoting well-being

and reducing rates of depression, suicidal ideation, and victimization. As seen in the right hand

side of Figure 1, future studies could examine how principal leadership and peer and teacher

awareness and support can enhance a supportive school climate. Moreover, future studies and

practice could focus on factors outside the school context. Such research could focus on how

school reform initiatives and support from universities, community organizations, and military

bases enhance the capacity of military-connected schools to develop supportive school climates.

 

155

A Whole School Approach. Findings in these studies also have relevance for a large

body of research that examines the role of supportive school climates in the social and emotional

outcomes of all students. The results of this dissertation showed that school climate still

promoted positive mental health outcomes and curbed negative mental health outcomes and

victimization rates among all students (military and non-military, with a deployed family

member and without a deployed family member). Being in a supportive and caring school

environment may be beneficial to all students, not only students experiencing the most severe

psychological stress, but also students throughout the mental health continuum. Hence, to benefit

the mental health outcomes of all students in a school, a whole school, social and emotional

climate intervention students could lead to large-scale reductions in depression, suicidal ideation,

and victimization rates.

However, schools typically apply a narrow intervention oriented approach to alleviating

mental health issues and victimization. Predominant in the clinical psychological, psychiatry, and

social work practice fields, an intervention approach only targets a small number of students with

the most severe levels of negative mental health and risky behaviors, while ignoring the social

and emotional needs of other students (Espelage & Swearer, 2009). Narrow school-based

interventions include school counseling, referrals to district mental health clinics, special

education services for severe behavioral and social issues, and isolated evidence-based practices

in classroom and counseling sessions.

A whole-school approach stems from primary prevention approaches already

implemented in public health practice and research. In the context of public health, a primary

prevention approach occurs when measures are taken to prevent diseases or injuries and promote

general well-being instead of exclusively curing or treating the symptoms (Espelage & Swearer,

 

156

2009). Schools that adopt a primary prevention approach seek reductions in mental health issues

and violence among all students. School wide approaches can be used to transform a school’s

social and emotional climate for all students. In the context of military-connected schools, efforts

to enhance caring relationships and belonging among students can promote well-being and curb

victimization among military and non-military students.

In the context of educational research, studies have a comprehensive school reform

approach to change student outcomes on a large scale (Borman, Hewes, Overman, & Brown,

2003; Datnow, 2005; Datnow, Borman, Stringfield, Overman, & Castellano, 2003). A

comprehensive school reform (CSR) approach involves various components. First, it is a

systematic approach to planning, implementing, and evaluating school-wide efforts that

incorporate all aspects of a school, including instruction, management, and parent involvement

(CASEL, 2003). Second, CSR models suggest that the successful implementation of a school

climate improvement effort requires the active engagement of the school, community, youth,

teachers and parents (CASEL, 2003). Research has found that authentic community approaches

to youth risk outcomes may have more sustainability than top-down approaches to school

improvement (Thornton, Craft, Dahlberg, Lynch, & Baer, 2008). The concept of CSR is

reflected in current research-based and data-driven models of school climate improvement,

including models developed by the National School Climate Center (NSCC) and the Center for

Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL).

Integrating School Climate into Current Educational Reform. These studies’ overall

findings indicate that school environments provide not only academic support, but also promote

key social and emotional outcomes for students. Hence, it is necessary that current American

educational reform initiatives also focus on creating supportive school environments and

 

157

providing students with opportunities to build social and emotional skills. In addition, these

findings suggest that schools can broaden their societal purpose by moving beyond an academic

focus and including a clear purpose in promoting healthy social and emotional development of

students.

Historically, urban schools since the early 19th century have enacted visions of

developing the social and emotional development of students. In the late 19th century, Addams

(1902) theorized that a student’s moral and civic development depended on the fulfillment of

students’ personal needs. In practice, this approach would require public schools to partner with

community organizations to provide social services for children and their families. In 1889,

Addams established the Hull House in Chicago, while other settlement houses were established

in impoverished urban neighborhoods. The Hull House provided recently arriving immigrant

children and their families with social services, extra-curricular and after-school programs, job

training, and financial assistance (Elshtain, 2001).

More recently in the 1970’s, Comer developed and implemented the School Development

Program in the New Haven Public Schools District. Comer (1984) posited that the “tasks of the

home, social network, and school is to prepare children to function optimally as adults--to obtain

the skills necessary to earn a living for themselves and their families--to become responsible and

competent individuals and/or heads of households, including good child-rearers, and to become

responsible citizens and to find satisfaction in life” (p. 324). Comer (1984) established a school

model that responded to the psychological and financial stressors of New Haven public school

students and their families. Similarly, Dryfoos (1984) conceptualized the full service school. The

term full-service school encompassed the following: a) school-based primary health clinics,

youth service programs, community schools, and other innovative efforts to improve access to

 

158

health facilities for delivering services through partnerships with community agencies and b) a

shared vision of youth development and financial support from sources outside school systems,

particularly states and foundations.

While schools could potentially address social and emotional development in addition to

academic skills, the improvement of academic outcomes, especially among historically

oppressed minority student populations, has been the central aim of the American K-12

educational policy. In the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) policy context, state accountability

systems have driven the academic focus of public schools; public schools are accountable for

monitoring and improving the academic achievement of all students through extensive state

accountability mandates. In contrast, state accountability systems leave it up to schools to

voluntarily purse school climate improvement and the development of social and emotional skills

(Cohen et al., 2009).

This policy context contradicts school climate and social and emotional learning research

A report from by the Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL) has

theorized that a nurturing, safe, and supportive school climate facilitates social and emotional

learning (CASEL, 2003). Social and emotional skills include being effective problem solvers,

recognizing the consequences of one’s actions, taking and responsibility for one’s personal

health and well-being. In addition, students with social and emotional skills know how to

develop effective social relationships such as learning how to work in a group and how to

understand and relate to others from different cultures and backgrounds. They are also caring

individuals with concern and respect for others, develop good character, make sound moral

decisions, and behave in an ethical and responsible manner. When students adopt these skills,

 

159

they not only become functioning adults with technical skills necessary for employment, but they

also become engaged, responsible citizens in a democracy.

Figure 1. Dissertation Studies within the Context of a Research Agenda

Military-specific External

risk issues

Family and community

supports

Social, emotional,

and psychological development of military

children

Principal Leadership

Teacher Awareness

and Support

Peer Awareness

support

Social Outcomes

Academic Outcomes

Emotional Outcomes

Supportive School Climate

School Reform for Supportive School Climates and Military Cultural Group

Support from Universities, Community Organizations, and Military Bases Societal Contextual Factors (e.g., popular attitudes toward military)

Military Contextual Factors (e.g. war, military branch)

 

160

Bibliography

Addams, J. (1902). Democracy and Social Ethics. New York: Macmillan.

Amen, D., Jellen, L., Merves, E., & Lee, R. (1988). Minimizing the impact of deployment

separation on military children: Stages, current preventative efforts and system

recommendations. Military Medicine, 153(9), 441-446.

Anyon, J. (1997). Ghetto Schooling: A Political Economy of Urban Educational Reform. New

York: Teachers College Press.

Astor, R. A., Meyer, H. A, & Behre, W. J. (1999). Unowned places and times: Maps and

interviews about violence in high schools. American Educational Research Journal, 36,

3-42.

Astor, R.A., Meyer, H., Benbenishty, R., Pat-Horencyk, R., Brom, D., Baum, N., Schiff, M., De

Pedro, K. (2011). The influence of the Second Lebanese War on Israeli students in urban

school settings: Findings of the Nahariya district-wide screening prototype. In Gallagher,

K.S., Brewer, D., Goodyear, R., & Bensimon, E. (eds.), International Handbook of

Research in Urban Education. New York: Taylor & Francis.

Austin, G., Bates, S., & Duerr, M. (2011). Guidebook for the California healthy kids survey part

I: Administration. San Francisco, CA: WestEd. Retrieved from

http://chks.wested.org/resources/chks_guidebook_1_admin.pdf on September 10, 2011.

Bond, L., Butler, H., Thomas, L., Carlin, J., Glover, S., Bowes, G., & Patton, G. (2007). 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,

9-18.

 

161

Bonny, A.E., Britto, M.D., Klostermann, B.K., Hornung, R.W., & Slap, G.B. (2000). School

disconnectedness: Identifying adolescents at risk. Pediatrics, 106(5), 1017-1021.

Borman, G., Hewes, G., Overman, L., & Brown, S. (2003) Comprehensive school reform and

achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research. 73(2), 125-230.

Bowen, G., Mancini, J., Martin, J., Ware, W., & Nelson, J. (2003). Promoting the adaptation of

military families: An empirical test of a community practice model. Family Relations,

52(1), 33-44.

Bradshaw, C.P., Sudhinaraset, M., Mmari, K., & Blum, R. (2010). School transitions among

military adolescents: A qualitative study of stress and coping. School Psychology Review,

39(1), 84-105.

Brand, S., Felner, R., Shim, M., Seitsinger, A., & Dumas, T. (2003). 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(3), 570-588.

Brookover, W., Schweitzer, J., Schneider, J., Beady, C., Flood, P., & Wisenbaker, J. (1978).

Elementary school social climate and school achievement. American Educational

Research Journal, 15(2), 301-318.

Burrell, L.M., Adams, G.A., Durand, D.B., & Castro, C.A. (2006). The impact of military

lifestyle demands on well-being, army, and family outcomes. Armed Forces & Society,

33(1), 43-58.

Camp, W. (1990). Participation in student activities and achievement: A covariance structural

analysis. Journal of Educational Research. 83(5), 272-278.

 

162

Chandra, A., Martin, L.T., Hawkins, S.A., & Richardson, A. (2010). The impact of parental

deployment on child social and emotional functioning: Perspectives of school staff.

Journal of Adolescent Health, 46(3), 218-223.

Chartrand, M.M. & Seigel, B. (2007). At war in Iraq and Afghanistan: Children in US military

families. Ambulatory Pediatrics, 7(1),1-2.

Cochran, Smith, M. (2005). The new teacher education: For better or for worse? Educational

Researcher. 34(7), pp. 3-17.

Cohen, J. (2006). Social, emotional, ethical, and academic education: Creating a climate for

learning, participation, democracy, and well-being. Harvard Educational Review. 76(2),

201-237.

Cohen, J., McCabe, L., Michelli, N., & Pickeral, T. (2009). School climate: Research, policy,

practice, and teacher education. Teachers College Record, 111(1), 180-213.

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. (2003). Safe and Sound: An

Educational Leader's guide to Evidence-Based Social and Emotional Learning (SEL)

Programs. Chicago, IL.

Comer, J.P. (1984). Home-school relationships as they affect the academic success of children.

Education and Urban Society. 16, 322-337.

Cozza, S.J., Chun, R.S., & Polo, J.A. (2005). Military families and children during Operation

Iraqi Freedom. Psychiatric Quarterly. 76(4), 371-378.

Datnow, A. (2005). Sustainability of comprehensive school reform models in changing district

and state contexts. The Journal of Leadership for Effective and Equitable Organizations.

41(1), 121-153.

 

163

Datnow, A., Borman, G., Stringfield, S., Overman, L., & Castellano, M. (2003). Comprehensive

school reform in culturally and linguistically diverse contexts: Implementation and

outcomes from a four-year study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 25(2),

143-170.

De Pedro, K., Astor, R.A., Benbenishty, R, Estrada, J.N., Smith, G.R., & Esqueda, M.C. (2011).

The children of military service members: Challenges, resources, and future educational

research. Review of Educational Research, 81(4), 566-618.

Dryfoos, J.G. (1995). Full service schools: Revolution or fad? Journal of Research on

Adolescence, 5(2), 147-172.

Eisenberg, M., Neumark-Sztainer, D., & Perry, C. (2003). Peer harassment, school

connectedness, and academic achievement. Journal of School Health, 73(8), 311-316.

Elliot, M., Cornell, D., Gregory, A., & Fan, X. (2010). Supportive school climate and student

willingness to seek help for bullying and threats of violence. Journal of School

Psychology, 48, 533-553.

Elshtain, J.B. (2001). The Jane Addams Reader. New York: Basic Books.

Espelage, D. & Swearer, S. (2007). A social-ecological model for bullying prevention and

internvetion. In Jimerson, S. (ed.), International Handbook of Bullying in Schools. New

York: Taylor & Francis.

Fenning, P. & Rose, J. (2007) Overrepresentation of African-American students in exclusionary

discipline: The role of school policy. Urban Education. 42(6), 536-559.

Finn, J., & Rock, D. (1997). Academic success among students at risk for school failure. Journal

of Applied Psychology, 82(2), 221-234.

 

164

Flake, E.M., Davis, B.E., Johnson, P.L., & Middleton, L.S. (2009). The psychosocial effects of

deployment on military children. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics,

30(4), 271-278.

Flanagan, C., & Stout, M. (2003). Developmental patterns of social trust between early and late

adolescence: Age and school climate effects. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20 (3),

748-773.

Galovski, T., & Lyons, J.A. (2004). Psychological sequelae of combat violence: A review of the

impact of PTSD on the veteran's family and possible interventions. Aggression and

Violent Behavior, 9(5), 477-501.

Gilreath, T.D., Astor, R.A., Cederbaum, J.A., Atuel, H., & Benbenishty, R. (2012). School

violence and victimization among military connected youth. Manuscript submitted for

publication.

Gorman, G., Eide, M., & Hisle-Gorman, E. (2010) Wartime military deployment and increased

pediatric mental and behavioral complaints. Pediatrics. 126, 1058-1066.

Gottfredson, G., Gottfredson, D., Payne, A. P., & Gottfredson, N. (2005). School climate

predictors of school disorder: Results from a national study of delinquency prevention in

schools. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 42(4), 412-444.

Greenberg, M.T., Weissberg, R.P., O’Brien, M.U., & Zins, J.E., Fredericks, L., Resnik, H., &

Elias, M.J. (2003). Enhancing school-based prevention and youth development through

coordinated social, emotional and academic learning. American Psychologist. 58(7), 466-

474.

 

165

Gutman, L., Sameroff, A., & Eccles, J. (2002). The academic achievement of African-American

students during early adolescence: An examination of multiple risk, promotive, and

protective factors. American Journal of Community Psychology, 30(3), 367-399.

Hanish, L. D., & Guerra, N. G. (2000). The roles of ethnicity and school context in predicting

children’s victimization by peers. American Journal of Community Psychology, 28, 201–

223.

Hernandez-Sheets, R. (2003). Competency vs. good intentions: Diversity ideologies and teacher

potential. Qualitative Studies in Education. 16(1), pp. 111-120.

Hernandez-Sheets, R. (2009). What is diversity pedagogy theory? Multicultural Education.

16(3), pp. 11-17.

Hoshmand, L.T., & Hoshmand, A.L. (2007). Support for military families and communities.

Journal of Community Psychology, 35(2), 171-180.

Hoy, W., & Hannum, J. (1997). Middle school climate: An empirical assessment of

organizational health and student achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly,

33(3), 290-311.

Hoy, W., Smith, P., & Sweetland, S. (2002). The development of the organizational climate

index for high schools: Its measure and relationship to faculty trust. The High School

Journal, 86(2), 38-49.

Hoy, W., Tarter, J., & Bliss, J. (1990). Organizational climate, school health, and effectiveness:

A comparative analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 26(3), 260-279.

Huebner, A.J., Mancini, J.A., Bowen, G.L., & Orthner, D.K. (2009). Shadowed by war: Building

community capacity to support military families. Family Relations, 58(2), 216-228.

 

166

Jia, Y., Way, N., Ling, G., Hirokazu, Y., Chen, X., Hughes, D., . . . Lu, Z. (2009). The influence

of student perceptions of school climate on socioemotional and academic adjustment: A

comparison of Chinese and American adolescents. Child Development, 80(5), 1514-1530.

Jordan, B.K., Marmar, C.R., Fairbank, J.A., Schlenger, W.E., Kulka, R.A., Hough, R.L., &

Weiss, D.S. (1992). Problems in families of male Vietnam veterans with posttraumatic

stress disorder. Journal of Counsulting and Clinical Psychology, 60(6), 916-926.

Kagan, D. (1990). How schools alienate students at risk: A model for examining proximal

classroom variables. Educational Psychologist, 25(2), 105-125.

Khoury-Kassabri, M., Benbenishty, R., Astor, R. A., & Zeira, A. (2004). The contributions of

community, family, and school variables to student victimization. American Journal of

Community Psychology, 34(3), 187-204.

Kitmitto, S., Huberman, M., Blankenship, C., Hannan, S., Norris, D., Christenson, B. (2011).

Educational Options and Performance of Military Connected School Districts Research

Study –Final Report. San Mateo, CA: American Institutes for Research.

Kuperminc, G., Leadbeater, B., & Blatt, S. (2001). School social climate and individual

differences in vulnerability to psychopathology among middle school students. Journal of

School Psychology, 39(2), 141-159.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The Dreamkeepers: Successful Teachers of African-American

Children. New York: Columbia University Press.

Loukas, A., Suzuki, R., & Horton, K. (2006). Examining school connectedness as a mediator of

school climate effects. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16(3), 491-502.

 

167

Lynch, M. & Cicchetti, D. (1997). Children’s relationships with adults and peers: An

examination of elementary and junior high school students. Journal of School

Psychology. 35(1), pp. 81-99.

MacDermid, S.M., Samper, R., Schwarz, R., Nishida, J., & Nyaronga, D. (2008). Understanding

and promoting resilience in military families. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University.

Marachi, R., Astor, R. A., & Benbenishty, R. (2006). Effects of student participation and teacher

support on victimization in Israeli schools: An examination of gender, culture, and school

type. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 36(2), 225-240.

McEvoy, A., & Welker, R. (2000). Antisocial behavior, academic failure, and school climate: A

critical review. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8, 130-140.

McGuire, J., Anderson, C., Toomey, R., & Russell, S. (2010). School climate for transgender

youth: A mixed method investigation of student experiences and school responses.

Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39, 1175-1188.

Medway, F.J., & Marchant, K.H. (1987). Adjustment and achievement associated with mobility

in military families. Psychology in the Schools, 24(3), 289-294.

Merrell, K.W., Gueldner, B.A., Ross, S.W., & Isava, D.M. (2008). How effective are school

bullying intervention programs? A meta-analysis of intervention research. School

Psychology Quarterly. 23(1), 26-42).

Mmari, K., Roche, K., Sudhinaraset, M., & Blum, R. (2009). When a parent goes off to war:

Exploring the issues faced by adolescents and their families. Youth and Society, 40(4),

455- 475.

Modin, B., & Ostberg, V. (2009). School climate and psychosomatic health: A multilevel

analysis. School effectiveness and school improvement, 20(4), 433-455.

 

168

Morris, A. S., & Age, T. R. (2009). Adjustment among youth in military families: The protective

roles of effortful control and maternal social support. Journal of Applied Developmental

Psychology.

Opportunities suspended: The devastating consequences of zero tolerance and school discipline.

(2000, June) Civil Rights Project. Retrieved May 14, 2009, from

www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/.../discipline_gen.php.

Pallas, A. (1988). School climate in American high schools. Teachers' College Record, 89 (4).

541-554.

Perkins, D.F. & Jones, K.R. (2003). Risk behaviors and resiliency within physically abused

adolescents. Child Abuse & Neglect, 28(5), 547-563.

Reed, S.C., Bell, J.F., & Edwards, T.C. (2011). Adolescent well-being in Washington state

military families. American Journal of Public Health, 101, 1676-1682.

Reed, S.C. Bell, J.F., & Edwards, T.C. (2011). Weapon carrying, physical fighting, and gang

membership among adolescents in Washington state military families. Paper presentation

at the American Public Health Association Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C.

Rhodes, J., Camic, P., Milburn, M., & Lowe, S. (2009). Improving middle school climate

through teacher-centered change. Journal of Community Psychology, 37(6), 711-724.

Robinson, J.P. & Espelage, D. (2011). Inequities in educational and psychological outcomes

between LGBTQ and straight students in middle school. Educational Researcher. 40(7),

315-330.

Rodriguez, A.J. & Margolin, G. (2011). Siblings of military servicemembers: A qualitative

exploration of individual and family systems reactions. Professional Psychology, 42(4),

316-323.

 

169

Rohall, D., Wechsler, M., & Segal, D. (1999). Examining the importance of organizational

supports on family adjustment to army life in a period of increasing separation. Journal

of Political and Military Sociology, 27(1), 49-65.

Rones, M. & Hoagwood, K. (2000). School-based mental health services: A research review.

Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 3(4), 223-241.

Rosenheck, R. (1986). Impact of posttraumatic stress disorder of World War II on the next

generation. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 174(6), 319-327.

Solomon, R.P., Palmer, H. (2006) Black boys through the school-prison pipeline Inclusion in

Urban Educational Environments: Addressing Issues of Diversity, Equity, and Social

Justice, Information Age Publishing, 2006.

Townsend, B. (2000). The disproportionate discipline of African-American learners: Reducing

school suspensions and expulsions. Exceptional Children, 66(3), p. 381-391.

U.S. Department of Defense. (2008). Memorandum of understanding between Department of

Defense and Department of Education. Washington, DC: Department of Defense.

Wang, M.-T. (2009). School climate support for behavioral and psychological adjustment:

Testing the mediating effect of social competence. School Psychology Quarterly, 24(4),

240-251.

Wilson, D. (2004). The interface of school climate and school connectedness and relationships

with aggression and victimization. The Journal of School Health, 74(7), 293-299.

 

170

Yin, M., Kitmitto, S., Shkolnik, J., Hoshen, G., Hannan, S., & Arellanes, M. (2011). Military

Connection and Student Achievement: A Look at the Performance of Military-Connected

Students in Eight Public School Districts. Washington, DC: American Institutes for

Research.

Zullig, K., Koopman, T., Patton, J., & Ubbes, V. (2010). School climate: Historical review,

instrumental development, and school assessment. Journal of Psychoeducational

Assessment, 28 139-152.