Examining the Built Environment of Schools Using the School Assessment for Environmental Typography (SAfETy)

Introduction: Many schools struggle to promote a safe and supportive learning environment and are challenged by high rates of student disruption, truancy, and school failure. This study will advance our understanding of the physical structures of high school environments that influence behavior and educational outcomes (Crosnoe, 2011). This work applies theories originally developed to characterize neighborhood influences, such as social disorganization theory (Sampson et al., 1997; Shaw & McKay, 1969) and Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (Crowe, 1991) to the school environment. Similar processes likely occur within the school environment whereby school-level environmental factors challenge the school’s ability to enforce norms of behavior. Unfortunately, few validated observational measures of the school physical environment exist to test these hypotheses.  

Methods: The Neighborhood Inventory for Environment Typography (NIfETy), a validated structured inventory to assess youth’s exposure to negative environmental indicators (Furr-Holden et al., 2008), was modified using diverse measures of the school environment (e.g., EPA, Educational Clearinghouse). The resulting measure, the School Assessment for Environmental Typography (SAfETy) was piloted in fall 2011 with 52 high schools in diverse settings across the state of Maryland. Observers participated in a two-day training, which included field training. Factor analytic techniques were used to create scales, and reliability was evaluated via interrater and internal consistency reliability.

Results: The SAfETy consists of 672 questions assessed over a three day time period in 9 different locations of the school: the entrance to the school grounds and the school building, school perimeter, hallways, stairwells, cafeteria, playing field, and student and staff parking lots. Average interrater reliability for the total scale was high (ICC=.84), through it varied by location. Final scales had acceptable levels of internal consistency (e.g., alcohol and other drugs ; disorder . Additional information will be presented about the relationship of the various scale constructs to youth involvement in risk behaviors (assessed by self-report survey measures).

Discussion: The SAfETy complements existing measures of the neighborhood environment demonstrating the influence of environmental determinants of health. This study fills a gap in the knowledge base as it provides a systematic observational tool to identify conditions that facilitate or threaten schools’ efforts to create safe and orderly learning environments for all students.