Multilevel multi-informant structure of the authoritative school climate survey

School Psychology Quarterly

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 238-255

  Konold, Timothy ^a   Cornell, Dewey ^a   Huang, Francis ^a   Meyer, Patrick ^a   Lacey, Anna ^a   Nekvasil, Erin ^a   Heilbrun, Anna ^a   Shukla, Kathan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Engagement and bullying; Multilevel factor analysis; School climate

Indexed keywords

BULLYING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PREVALENCE; PSYCHOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCHOOL; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT; SOCIAL SUPPORT; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; STUDENT;

BULLYING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PREVALENCE; QUESTIONNAIRES; SCHOOLS; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT; SOCIAL SUPPORT; STUDENTS;

EID: 84925587182     PISSN: 10453830     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/spq0000062     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. American Institutes for Research. (2013). School climate survey compendia. Retrieved from http:// safesupportivelearning.ed.gov/topic-research/ school-climate-measurement/school-climatesurvey- compendium.
2. Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45, 369-386. doi:10.1002/pits.20303.
3. Austin, G., & Duerr, M. (2005). Guidebook for the California Healthy Kids Survey. Part III. School Climate Survey for teachers and other staff, 2005- 2006 ed. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.
4. Baker, J. A., Clark, T. P., Crowl, A., & Carlson, J. S. (2009). The influence of authoritative teaching on children's school adjustment: Are children with behavioural problems differentially affected? School Psychology International, 30, 374-382. doi:10.1177/0143034309106945.
5. Bandyopadhyay, S., Cornell, D., & Konold, T. (2009). Internal and external validity of three school climate scales from the School Climate Bullying Survey. School Psychology Review, 38, 338-355.
6. Baumrind, D. (1968). Authoritarian vs. authoritative parental control. Adolescence, 3, 255-272.
7. Bear, G. G., Gaskins, C., Blank, J., & Chen, F. F. (2011). Delaware School Climate Survey-Student: Its factor structure, concurrent validity, and reliability. Journal of School Psychology, 49, 157- 174. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2011.01.001.
8. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588- 606. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588.
9. Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, nonindependence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & W. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions and new directions (pp. 349-381). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
10. Bradshaw, C. P., Mitchell, M. M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Examining the effects of schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports on student outcomes: Results from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, 133-148. doi:10.1177/1098300709334798.
11. 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, 570-588. doi:10.1037/0022-0663 .95.3.570.
12. Browne, M., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. Bollen & J. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
13. Byrne, B. M. (2012). Structural equation modeling with MPlus: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. New York, NY: Routledge.
14. Card, N. A., Stucky, B. D., Sawalani, G. M., & Little, T. D. (2008). Direct and indirect aggression during childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic review of gender differences, intercorrelations, and relations to maladjustment. Child Development, 79, 1185-1229.
15. Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245- 276. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10.
16. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233-255. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5.
17. Clifford, M., Menon, R., Gangi, T., Condon, C., & Hornung, K. (2012). Measuring school climate for gauging principal performance: A review of the validity and reliability of publicly accessible measures. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research. doi:10.1037/e572172012-001.
18. Cohen, J., McCabe, L., Michelli, N. M., & Pickeral, T. (2009). School climate: Research, policy, practice, & teacher education. Teachers College Record, 111, 180-213.
19. Cornell, D. G. (2013). The Authoritative School Climate Survey and the School Climate Bullying Survey: Description and research summary (Unpublished report). University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.
20. Cornell, D., Gregory, A., Huang, F., & Fan, X. (2013). Perceived prevalence of bullying and teasing predicts high school dropout rates. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 138-149. doi:10.1037/a0030416.
21. Cornell, D., Huang, F., Konold, T., Meyer, P., Lacey, A., Nekvasil, E., Shukla, K. (2013). Technical Report of the Virginia Secondary School Climate Survey: 2013 results for 7th and 8th grade students and teachers. Executive summary 1. Charlottesville, VA: Curry School of Education, University of Virginia.
22. Cornell, D., Klein, J., Konold, T., & Huang, F. (2012). Effects of validity screening items on adolescent survey data. Psychological Assessment, 24, 21-35. doi:10.1037/a0024824.
23. Cornell, D. G., Lovegrove, P. J., & Baly, M. W. (2014). Invalid survey response patterns among middle school students. Psychological Assessment, 26, 277-287. doi:10.1037/a0034808.
24. Cornell, D., & Mayer, M. (2010). Why do school order and safety matter? Educational Researcher, 39, 7-15.
25. Dary, T., & Pickeral, T. (Eds.) (2013). School climate: Practices for implementation and sustainability. A school climate practice brief, Number 1. New York, NY: National School Climate Center.
26. Dedrick, R. F., & Greenbaum, P. E. (2011). Multilevel confirmatory factor analysis of a scale measuring interagency collaboration of children's mental health agencies. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 19, 27-40. doi:10.1177/ 1063426610365879.
27. Ding, C., Liu, Y., & Berkowitz, M. (2011). The study of factor structure and reliability of an abbreviated school climate survey. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 26, 241-256. doi:10.1177/ 0829573511414005.
28. Dyer, N. G., Hanges, P. J., & Hall, R. J. (2005). Applying multilevel confirmatory factor analysis techniques to the study of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 149-167. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua .2004.09.009.
29. Ertesvåg, S. K. (2011). Measuring authoritative teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 51-61. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2010.07.002.
30. Fan, X., Thompson, B., & Wang, L. (1999). Effects of sample size, estimation methods, and model specification on structural equation modeling fit indexes. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 56-83. doi:10.1080/10705519909540119.
31. Faster, D., & Lopez, D. (2013). School climate measurement and analysis. In T. Dary & T. Pickeral, (Eds.), School climate practices for implementation and sustainability. A school climate practice brief, Number 1 (pp. 1-5). New York, NY: National School Climate Center.
32. Gerbing, D., & Anderson, J. (1992). Monte Carlo evaluations of goodness of fit indices for structural equation models. Sociological Methods and Research, 21, 132-160. doi:10.1177/ 0049124192021002002.
33. Gill, M. G., Ashton, P., & Algina, J. (2004). Authoritative schools: A test of a model to resolve the school effectiveness debate. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 389-409. doi:10.1016/j .cedpsych.2003.10.002.
34. Gregory, A., Allen, J. P., Mikami, A. Y., Hafen, C. A., & Pianta, R. C. (2014). Effects of a professional development program on behavioral engagement of students in middle and high school. Psychology in the Schools, 51, 143-163. doi: 10.1002/pits.21741.
35. Gregory, A., & Cornell, D. (2009). "Tolerating" adolescent needs: Moving away from zero tolerance policies in high school. Theory into Practice, 48, 106-113. doi:10.1080/00405840902776327.
36. Gregory, A., Cornell, D., & Fan, X. (2011). The relationship of school structure and support to suspension rates for Black and White high school students. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 904-934. doi:10.3102/0002831211398531.
37. Gregory, A., Cornell, D.,& Fan, X. (2012). Teacher safety and authoritative school climate in high schools. American Journal of Education, 118, 401-425.
38. Gregory, A., Cornell, D., Fan, X., Sheras, P., & Shih, T. (2010). Authoritative school discipline: High school practices associated with lower student bullying and victimization. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 483-496. doi:10.1037/a0018562.
39. Gregory, A., & Weinstein, R. S. (2004). Connection and regulation at home and in school: Predicting growth in achievement for adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 19, 405-427. doi:10.1177/ 0743558403258859.
40. Gregory, A., & Weinstein, R. S. (2008). A window on the discipline gap: Cooperation or defiance in the classroom. Journal of School Psychology, 46. 455-475. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2007.09.001.
41. Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179-185. doi:10.1007/BF02289447.
42. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 76- 99). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
43. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55. doi:10.1080/ 10705519909540118.
44. Huang, F., Cornell, D., Konold, T. R., Meyer, P., Lacey, A., Nekvasil, E., Shukla, K. (2013). Factor structure and concurrent validity of the teacher version of the authoritative school climate survey. Manuscript submitted for publication.
45. Hughes, J. N. (2002). Authoritative teaching: Tipping the balance in favor of school versus peer effects. Journal of School Psychology, 40, 485-492. doi: 10.1016/S0022-4405(02)00125-5.
46. Juvonen, J., Nishina, A., & Graham, S. (2000). Peer harassment, psychological adjustment, and school functioning in early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 349-359. doi:10.1037/ 0022-0663.92.2.349.
47. Kaiser, H. F. (1958). The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 23, 187-200. doi:10.1007/BF02289233.
48. Kane, M. T. (2006). Validation. In R. L. Brennan (Ed.), Educational Measurement: American Council on Education/Praeger Series on Higher Education (4th ed., pp. 17-64). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
49. Keith, T. Z. (1997). Using confirmatory factor analysis to aid in understanding the constructs measured by intelligence tests. In D. P. Flanagan, J. L. Genshaft, & P. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 373-402). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
50. Klein, J., Cornell, D., & Konold, T. (2012). Relationships between bullying, school climate, and student risk behaviors. School Psychology Quarterly, 27, 154-169. doi:10.1037/a0029350.
51. Klein, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
52. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Klein, K. J. (2000). A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In K. J. Klein & W. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 3-90). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
53. Lacey, A., & Cornell, D. (2013). The impact of bullying climate on schoolwide academic performance. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 29, 262-283. doi:10.1080/15377903.2013.806883.
54. Larzelere, R. E., Morris, A. S., & Harrist, A. W. (Eds.). (2013). Authoritative parenting: Synthesizing nurturance and discipline for optimal child development. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/13948-000.
55. Lautenschlager, G. J. (1989). A comparison of alternatives to conducting Monte Carlo analyses for determining parallel analysis criteria. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 365-395. doi:10.1207/ s15327906mbr2403_6.
56. Lee, J. S. (2012). The effects of the teacher-student relationship and academic press on student engagement and academic performance. International Journal of Educational Research, 53, 330- 340. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2012.04.006.
57. Lopez, D. (2013). School climate measurement and analysis. In T. Dary & T. Pickeral (Eds.), School climate: Practices for implementation and sustainability. A school climate practice brief, Number 1 (pp. 1-5). New York, NY: National School Climate Center. Retrieved from http://www.schoolclimate .org/publications/practice-briefs.php.
58. Marsh, H. W., Nagengast, B., Morin, A. J. S., Parada, R. H., Craven, R. G., & Hamilton, L. R. (2011). Construct validity of the multidimensional structure of bullying and victimization: An application of exploratory structural equation modeling. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 701-732. doi: 10.1037/a0024122.
59. Mehta, S. B., Cornell, D., Fan, X., & Gregory, A. (2013). Bullying climate and school engagement in ninth grade students. Journal of School Health, 83, 45-52. doi:10.1111/j.1746-1561.2012.00746.x.
60. Muthén, B. O. (1991). Multilevel factor analysis of class and student achievement components. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 338-354. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1991.tb00363.x.
61. Muthén, B. (1997). Latent variable modeling with longitudinal and multilevel data. In A. Raftery (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1997 (pp. 453- 480). Boston, MA: Blackwell. doi:10.1111/1467- 9531.271034.
62. National Center for Education Statistics. (2005). School crime supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. Retrieved from http://nces .ed.gov/Programs/Crime/surveys.asp.
63. Newton, P. E., & Shaw, S. D. (2013). Standards for talking and thinking about validity. Psychological Methods, 18, 301-319. doi:10.1037/a0032969.
64. Olweus, D. (2007). The Olweus Bullying Questionnaire. Center City, MN: Hazelden.
65. Pellerin, L. A. (2005). Applying Baumrind's parenting topology to high schools: Toward a middlerange theory of authoritative socialization. Social Science Research, 34, 283-303. doi:10.1016/j .ssresearch.2004.02.003.
66. Raudenbush, S. W., Rowan, B., & Kang, S. J. (1991). A multilevel, multivariate model for studying school climate with estimation via the EM algorithm and application to U.S. high school data. Journal of Educational Statistics, 16, 295-330. doi:10.2307/1165105.
67. Reise, S. P., Ventura, J., Nuechterlein, K. H., & Kim, K. H. (2005). An illustration of multilevel factor analysis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 84, 126-136. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8402_02.
68. Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2010). A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
69. Swearer, S. M., Espelage, D. L., Vaillancourt, T., & Hymel, S. (2010). What can be done about school bullying? Linking research to educational practice. Educational Researcher, 39, 38-47. doi:10.3102/ 0013189X09357622.
70. Thapa, A. S., Cohen, J., Guffey, S., & Higgins- D'Alessandro, A. (2013). A review of school climate research. Review of Educational Research, 83, 357-385. doi:10.3102/0034654313483907.
71. Thornberry, T. P., Lizotte, A. J., Krohn, M. D., Farnworth, M., & Jang, S. J. (1991). Testing interactional theory: An examination of reciprocal causal relationships among family, school, and delinquency. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 82, 3-35. Retrieved from http://scholarlycommons.law.northwes tern.edu/jclc/vol82/iss1/2.
72. U.S. Department of Education. (2010). Safe and supportive schools. Retrieved from http://www2.ed .gov/programs/safesupportiveschools/applicant .html.
73. Velicer, W. F., Eaton, C. A., & Fava, J. L. (2000). Construct explication through factor or component analysis: A view and evaluation of alternative procedures for determining the number of factors or components. In R. D. Goffin & E. Helmes (Eds.), Problems and solutions in human assessment: A festschrift to Douglas Jackson at seventy (pp. 41- 71). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4615-4397-8_3.
74. Walker, J. M. (2008). Looking at teacher practices through the lens of parenting style. Journal of Experimental Education, 76, 218 -240. doi: 10.3200/JEXE.76.2.218-240.