Table 2.
Model 1: Boys |
Model 2: Girls |
|||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B | (SE) | SemiP^2 | B | (SE) | SemiP^2 | |
Contextual Contributors to School Misbehavior | ||||||
Region (ref=Midwest): | 0.0003 | 0.0008** | ||||
Northeast | 0.00 | (0.05) | −0.09* | (0.04) | ||
South | 0.05 | (0.04) | −0.01 | (0.03) | ||
West | 0.01 | (0.05) | 0.01 | (0.04) | ||
Urbanicity (ref=Suburban): | 0.0000 | 0.0001 | ||||
City | 0.01 | (0.04) | 0.03 | (0.03) | ||
Town | −0.10* | (0.05) | −0.01 | (0.04) | ||
Rural | −0.05 | (0.03) | −0.07* | (0.03) | ||
School type (ref=Public): | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | ||||
Catholic | −0.17** | (0.05) | −0.19*** | (0.05) | ||
Other private | 0.02 | (0.07) | 0.05 | (0.06) | ||
Percent students eligible for free or reduced lunch | 0.00 0.00 |
(0.00) | 0.0005 | 0.00 | (0.00) | 0.0016* |
Percent student Black | 0.00 | (0.00) | 0.0000 | 0.00 | (0.00) | 0.0002 |
Percent students Latinx | 0.00 | (0.00) | 0.0003* | 0.00 | (0.00) | 0.0002 |
Percent students Asian | 0.00 | (0.00) | 0.0003* | 0.00 | (0.00) | 0.0001 |
Negative peer climate | 0.01 | (0.02) | 0.0003* | 0.02 | (0.02) | 0.0001 |
Adolescents’ Negative Experiences | ||||||
With teachers | 0.14*** | (0.01) | 0.0159*** | 0.12*** | (0.01) | 0.0139*** |
With math course placement | 0.02 | (0.02) | 0.0008** | 0.04* | (0.02) | 0.0010*** |
With achievement | 0.51*** | (0.02) | 0.1461*** | 0.44*** | (0.02) | 0.1320*** |
Constant | 0.14** | (0.04) | −0.14*** | (0.05) |
Source: US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, “The High School Longitudinal Study of 2009” 2009.
Note: The results for the predictors with the two largest squared semipartial correlations (SemiP^2) for boys and girls are bolded.
p < 0.001
p < 0.01
p < 0.05.