SCHOOL BOY VANDALISM IN THE HUTT VALLEY

PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS

Occasional Papers in Criminology No. 8

ISSN 0110-1773

Michael Stace

Institute of Criminology

Victoria University of Wellington ' CON'l':t:N'l'8

Page

Foreword

L The Research Project

Planning 1

Summary R

2. Preliminary Analysis

A. Introduction 10 B. The Most Frequently Admitted Acts 12

C. Seriousness 18 D. Police Youth Aid Statistics 20

E • Summary 2 2

References 24

Appendix A 25

Appendix B 28

.FOREWORD

An earlier Occasional Paper, namely Noc 6, February 1978, was written by Mr Michael Stace of this Institute on the subject of Vandalism and Self­ RepoEt Studies : A Review of the Literature. ':rhe present paper by Mr Stace gives some of the results from a questionnaire administered in four New Zealand post-primary schools, namely, the Hutt Valley High School, the Hutt Valley Memorial Technical College, Naenae College, and Taita College.

We are 1m'.!eLted to Mr W. RAnwick, Director-General of Education tor the help and encouragement he and his senior officers 1;:rave to the launching of the project. We thank Mr E. Flaws, the Principal of Tawa College and Mr A. McLean, School Counsellor, for their helpful reception and adoption of the proposal that a pilot scheme be administered at Tawa College. We are also appreciative of the reception and support later given by the following principals of the four post-primary schools in the Hutt Valley and also the school counsellors as set out below;-

School Principal Guidance Counsellor

Hutt Valley High School M.r I. R. McLean Mr B.C. Burton

Hutt Valley Memorial Technical College Mr G ....J. Rowe Mr H. Davis

Naenae College Mr D.E. Wood Mr D. Carpenter Acting Senior Master

'I"ai ta College Mr J.W. Anderson Mr R. Rosemergy l'>long with Mr Flaws and Mr McLean of 'l'awa College they were invited to atteild a. meeting convened by Mr P. Boag, Deputy Director-General of Education to explain the project. We were particularly impressed ,,1ith their genuine concern with the question of vandalism and also with other phases of the question of violence.

We place on record our appreciation of the willing participation of students at the five schools as mentioned above.

We acknowledge the statistical data made available by the present Comrnissioner of Police, Mr R.J. liilalton and by his immediate predecessor, Mr K"B" Burnside and other officers, in particular the staff of the Youth Aid Section.

During the conceptual stage of the project we were helped by consult­ ations with Mr John Croft, Director of the Home Office Research Unit and Mr Kevin IL Heal, now Principal Research Officer in that Unit. 'rhese consult- ations took place while I was visiting England in 1975 and 1977 and also in the course of correspondence. In addition we had the advantage of consultation with the following 1rihile they were on vis.its tc New Zealand:

a'" Professor ~rohn Ll .. J- .. Edwards" Faculty of Law a.nd Centre of Criminology, University of Toronto, C-anada,.

b. Albert Morris, Professor Emc2,ritus, Department of Sociology, Boston University, Boston.

c. Professor Leslie T. Wilkins, Schoel ot Criminal Justice, State University of New York, Albany, New York.

The Institute of Criminology was established at Victoria University of Wellington on the 1st J·anuary 197 5 as part of 'che Faculty of .i\rts. Its functions include the teaching of criminology, the conduct and promotion of research, and the encouragement of co-ordination within the University on questions relating to criminoloqy. 'fhe sta:Ef at present crnJ.sists of: the Director, one Lecturer, Mr Michael Stace and three Research Fellows, namely, Mr Robert Burnett, Mr John B2.low and Miss J·ane Bradbury" The staff work as a team to discharge the Institute' s teach.ing and research functions. Th.e author of a paper is personally responsible for st,,ch opinions as are expressed, but he h,rn the benefit of consultation and discussion within the Institute and elsewhere within the University. In the case of this particular paper the author has had substantial hel9 from Miss Jane Bradbury both in the interpretation and the effective prese11tation of statistical data.

The earlier Occasional Paper No. 6 referred to above and the present one, No. 8, represent a valuable addition to relevant knowledge on the subject of vandalism. This particuJ.a.r paper has the added ad,;'antage of focusing upon a major urban area within New Zealand.

,J" L. Robson Director August 1978. 1. THE RESEARCH PROJ.ECT

Planning Tho Lopic of V

The possibility of combining research into vandalism with a self­ report study was first considered by the Institute's staff in September

1975 folluwing a visit by Dr J.L. Robson, the Direclor, Lo Geneva. [01. Uw Fifth United Nations Congress on Crime and the Treatment of Offenders. While in Europe he also had discussions with members of the United Kingdom Home Office Research Unit who were working in this area.

'fhe basic question faced by the Institute was whether a self-report study was worth doing. That depended on whether the results likely to be obtained were sufficiently reliable to be used as some indication as to the amount of criminal behaviour in a society. It involved appraising work previously done in a number of countries. The literature 1,vas reviewed and the conclusion reached was that, provided the research design was prepared ,,'7ith considerable care, the results would have a general validity in providing a more sensitive account of total offending within a cornrnuni ty than do the official statistics., They may provide some valuable leads towards the actual amount of offending in a community and may call into question the conceptions held by many about crime and criminals. Stace (1978) provides a review of the literature on both vandalism and self­ report studies.

The Advisory Committee of the Institute of Criminology, meeting in November 1975, concurred with a proposal to study vandalism through the medium of a self-report study. An important factor which has continually weighed upon the Institute's staff has been their limited resources. It was necessary whenever research proposals were discussed to ensure that the resources by way of skills and time, available to the Institute, will be able to handle the project.

Considerable discussion on the research design followed. It was decided early in the piece that our sample would be drawn from s,econdary school children in the Hutt Valley. School children were to be the focus because most work with self-report studies had been directed towards them and to some extent they were a captive audience, The Hutt Va.lley was selected as the study area. It provided a self-contained geographical area not apparently dissimilar to the rest of New Zealand. However, decisions 2. were required upon numerous other issues, such as the size and selection of sample, age group of sample, use of interview or questionnaire, activities to be covered, liaison with schools .and other agencies.

These matters were reviewed in March 1976 and comments from a Senior Research Officer in the Home Office with experience-in self-report research were taken into account. Visiting the Institute at the time was 1-'ro±essor Albert Morris, ±ormerly o± Boston University, who was able to contribute on the research design from his experience. We had to decide what information we sought and for what purpose. The conclusion reached was to seek information which could throw light on commonly held conceptions about youthful vandalism. Accordingly, we decided to limit the questionnaire to boys aged 14, 15 and 16 years, of all ethnic origins, of all socio-economic statuses.classified by the father's occupation, and covering the full range of educational achievement. The other important decision was to obtain information not only over the range of vandalism but also to cover the leisure pursuits of the boys and their attitudes to school, parents and their peers. It was believed that a common perception of vandals was that they tended to be the boys who neither participated in organized recreation nor pursued hobbies.

We also decided that it would be useful to collect information from the Youth Aid Section of the Lower Hutt Police for the same period to be covered by the survey to see if there were any important differences between official and unofficial vandals. A pilot run of the questionnaire, it was decided, would also be beneficial.

The next step was the preparation of tµe questionnaire and as a basis two Home Office questionnaires were perused in some detail. The draft questionnaire was considered by the Institute staff and copies were forwarded to various Government research sections and to those within the University with appropriate experience. Most of those from whom assistance was sought gave generously of their time and experience. The question of the attitude of parents and the Post Primary Teachers' Association was raised, with the suggestion that their co-operation should be sought prior to administering the questionnaire. The attitude of the Police to the project was also sought at this time.

In May 1976, in view of the progress being made, a statement on the project was prepared for discussion within the Institute. The statement outlined the objective of the project as follows:-

"This project is designed to elicit: (1) Some idea as to the quantum of vandalism committed by school boys in the 14-16 age range in a specific area, and (2) Some factors which may distinguish between the following among school boys: (a) Vandals and non vandals; 3.

{b) Vand.alism committed by 14 versus 15 versus 16 year olds;

{c) Types of vandalism committed by school boys of different social, educational and racial backgrounds;

(d) The relationship between the types of leisure activities and the amount and types of vandalism committed by schoolboys;

(e) The relationship between parental attitudes and the amount and types of vandalism;

(f) The relationship between the schoolboys' attitudes to school and their peer groups and the amount and types of vandalism they commit. "

In retrospect the objectives have been found to be too ambitious but (1) and (2) (a) to (d) remain as aims of the project.

A plan of action was also prepared which outlined the pilot run planned for a secondary school outside of the Hutt Valley. The sample from this school was not to be taken on a random basis but the boys were to be selected to our requirements. It was part of the plan to visit the school following the questionnaire administration, to interview individually at least some of the respondents on a confidential basis, and to discuss the questionnaire with them. The immediate requirement was approval in principle of the entire project by the Director-General of Education and approval for the pilot run from the Principal of Tawa College, the selected secondary school.

The objective of a related but distinct project was formulated as well. This would involve the recording of the total number of complaints of acts of vandalism received by the Police in the target area. Approval in principle of the project was obtained from the Commissioner of Police but the practical aspects of the exercise required further discussion with the Police. It was intended that the information collected from the self-report study would be compared with the information obtained from the Police.

The analysis of the material when collected was also a question which was discussed at that time. Advice was sought from the Director of the University's Computer Centre and from other University staff members, especially those with experience in survey research.

In June 1976, Professor Leslie Wilkins of the State University of New York at Albany, visited the Institute of Criminology and from his experience he was able to offer advice on the methodology being employed, One practical concern relevant in the United States had been the protection of the respond­ ents. The master list which could link names to questionnaires, he suggested, should either be destroyed or deposited in another legal jurisdiction. In the light of our exper.Leuce vviU1 Llle' Nev, :l':ealancl Police it was decided that such safeguards were unnecessary, a decision justified by subsequent experience. Followihg discussions with Professor Wilkins and other interested

pn rt i PS the final format of the questionnaire was d,!!ci;Jed UJc:O,i ctw.l typed.

At the end of the month the Director cf the Institute visited the Director-General of Education and obtained his approval for the project. The latter agreed to contact the Principal of Tawa College, the Post Primary Teachers' Association and the Secondary Principals' Association, He suggested we prepare a letter for the parents of the boys and a press release. He expressed his interest in a survey of vandalism incorporating girls, but, in view of our limited resources, he was told ·i:hat we had clef erred such a project :for th@ time being.

In late July, following the Director-General's approach, Dr Robson visited Mr E. Flaws, the Principal of "rawa College, followed by a further raeeting a few days later when Mr A. McLeat1 ,, the School Counsellor, and I were also present. Mr McLean was designated the liaison teacher and would be present when the questionnaire was administered. .After discussion it was decided not to se,ak the parents' permission nor a.d.vise the media.. Mr Flaws commented that the school frequently co-operated with research pl:ojects and through experience it had been found that such permission was unnecessary. Mr McLean agreed to select the boys to our requirements. These included 20 from each age group, 14, 15 and 16,, witb, a. range of academic ability and ethnic origins. We wanted to ensure that the questionnaire was appropriate to all respondents, A date suitable to the school and ourselves was agreed upon. A press release was prepared should the media approach the Institute but it was left to their initiative.

The questionnaire was adm.inist.ered on the 16th lmgt,st 1976 to 44 boys. Some concern had been expressed prior to the administration that the questionnaire was unduly lengthy. It was vdth some relief that most of the boys completed the questionnaire within 45 minutes although two of the slower ones took 90 rninnt,es .. Mr McLean was present while the questionnaire was being completed, except for the last two who took longer than 75 minutes. The boys seemed interested in their task.

The following day all the completed questionnaiz:·es were reviewed. A few had not responded to all the questions. For a fair range of opinion 32 of the respondents were selected to be seen by myself. Three days after the admin- istration,, 29 of the 32 boys selected were seen individually and their re­ actions to the questionnaire were sorn;ht. Most expressed considerable interest and stated that their responses had been honest, although some doubt was cast upon the reliability of their fellow students. They stated that the range of vandalistic acts and leisure pursuits inquired into covered activities of 5.

their age group, although some of the 16 year olds were a little critical of what they described as simple phrasing of the questions. One respondent pointed out an error in the construction of one question which had been overlooked by all whO had previously commented.

Further action on the questionnaires was deferred pending the completion of teaching commitments for the year.

In September,.the Police qave permission for the Institute staff to take notes from Youth Aid Section records. It was also decided at that time to administer the questionnaire to the main sample in mid-1977 to cover ,, activities which occurred in the previous six months, that is since Christmas 1976. The Police would make available Youth Aid records from Lower Hutt for January - June 1977. The District Youth Aid Section forward to Headquarters for statisti-cal purposes a copy of the record of all youths dealt with. The form contained sufficient information for our purposes.

A continuing concern was to assess the role of the self-report study of vandalism w1thin the total research programme of the Institute and the st'aff discussed this in some detail in October that year. It was decided that the first paper to be published about the study would contain a review of the literature relating both to vandalism and self-report methodology and describe the project being undertaken. A tentative date for publication was set at mid-1977.

A review of the pilot run at the end of the year led to the following conclusions. Firstly, that the questionnaire was too long. Most respondents had taken about 45 minutes to complete it which those with experience .in this area had said was a little beyond the concentration of school boys of that age group. As well, it was realized that there would be too much information for later analysis. Secondly, that the experience gained by the pilot run was proving invaluable, and thirdly, that such research benefitted from care­ ful and thorough preparation. Time taken in planning may delay the publica­ tion of any results, but the results would be improved with careful, if time­ consuming, preparation.

In 1977, work began on revising the questionnaire. It was decided to concentrate upon the relationship between leisure activities and vandalism. The organization and range of the leisure activities were revised in view of the work published at that time by the New Zealand Council for Recreation and Sport (Robb and Howorth, 1977). The Council had undertaken a survey of recreation in New Zealand and had evolved a classification of leisure activi­ ties. The classification derived from that survey was incorporated into the re-written leisure activities section of the questionnaire.

In April of that year, Professor John Edwards from th

DPVP.1 oprnpnt Cnnnri .1, who hnvP fl f'nntinn.i ng rnnf'f."rn with the role o:E young people in society. The section in the questionnaire dealing with the res- pondent's attitude to school was deleted, It was felt that this area required a survey of its own to produce worthwhile results, The sections dealing with attitudes to peers and parents were the areas where it was intended to defer analysis.

About th~ same time, May 1977, iL wa.o aliso deeldeu U1al il. 11wulcl Le preferable to publish the initial reports in two parts. 'fhe first part would be a survey of the literature relating to vandalism and self-report studies, and the second part, this paper, would describe our study and present some preliminary results.

Steps were being undertaken at that time to obtain the approval of the principals of th~ schools selected for our research. Lower Hutt had been decided upon as the target a.rea, and there are four state secondary schools in the area. We wanted to draw our sample from all the schools. 'rhe question o:E sample size was one which ',vas considered in some detail. It was necessary to have a sample of a sufficient num.ber to enable later analysis of groups of significant size, but it was also necessary that our resources could cope with the number of questionnaires. The sample size of 300 was finally agreed upor1. In retrospect it would appear that a larger sample, say 400 or 500, may have been preferable, as some of the groups obtained in the results are too small for analysis. 'l'l:1is point had been considered but our estimates proved to be too low.

In view of the Department of Education's involvement in the project we requested the Department to arrange a meeting o:E the principals of the four schools, together with Mr Flaws and Mr McLean of Tawa College, at which Dr Robson and I would present our proposals.

The meeting was held at the Department of Education on 3rd J·une, chaired by Mr Peter Boag, Deputy Director-General of Education. Mr Flaws and Mr McLean from Tawa College attended together with Mr D.E. Wood, Principal of Naenae College, Mr G. J', Rowe, Principal of Hutt Valley Memorial Technical College, Mr ,T.1'iiJ. Andersen, Principal of Taita College, and Mr P.G. Canham of Hutt Valley Hiqh School, representing the Principal, Mr,I.R. McLean. Dr Robson and I were also present. Our proposals were on paper and were distributed to the principals. Mr Flaws assured them that he had not, for his part, found the project unduly time consuming and he added that he thought it a worthwhile study.

The proposal was similar to our statement prepared in May 197G, although points (e) and (f) included in the earlier statement, were omitted. Those two points dealt with attitudes. We retained the emphasis upon quantity

1 Pi S11TP il.r:t ivi tj PS. Our work to date and present plans were outlined and the principals presented with two specific requests. Firstly, a list of all boys aged 14, 15 and 16 at each school, and secondly, that a teacher be assigned to assist who would arrange that all the boys selected by the Institute gather in a suitable place at the appropriate time. Ideally, it was considered that the questionnaire should be administered at all the schools at the same time. As that was not practically possible it was suggest- ed that the questionnaire be administered at the four schools over two days. I would be in att"1ndance sl.t each school 11t the appro[lri.ilb? tim0 tn distri hnte the questionnaires which would record only a number for each boy. The master list linking names and numbers would be retained by the Institute"

'l'he principals were co-operative and arranged to meet our requests as soon as possible. They expressed concern about fema.le vandalism and violence but it was explained to them that that was not part of the current project, although a subject about which others had also expressed concern.

Again the question of a press release was raised. It was concluded that a release would be prepared but not distributed unless a specific request was received from the media. Prior information, it was considered, could well have an adverse effect upon the boys, an effect which we 1,vished to avoid. 'rhe release would be prepared to make it clear that the project was at the Institute's initiative, not at the request of any Government Department.

The dates for administering the questionnaire were set for Thursday and Friday, 30th June and 1st July 1977. All the schools forwarded relevant class lists to which the age had been added. At three colleges the school counsellor was appointed as the liaison teacher for the project, and at the fourth, the acting senior master.

When all the lists had been received the boys were numbered consecu- tively, there being 1539 in total. Using the random numbers provided in Blalock (1972), 350 boys were selected. The list of the selected sample was then returned to each school.

The questionnaire was administered on the morning of the 30th J·une at Naenae College and on the afternoon of that day at Hutt Valley High School. On the morning of the 1st July it was administered at Hutt Valley Memorial Technical College and in the afternoon at •raita College" At each school, except Hutt Valley Memorial Technical College the questionna_ire was admin- istered to the entire sample at one time" At the latter school the fifth 8.

and sixth formers were seen first and the third and fourth formers after- ,,1ards. Most respondents completed the questionnaire within 40 minutes.

At each school the liaison teacher was present when the questionnaire was distributed initially. 'I'hey then made arrangements for those in the sample who had failed to report, to be summoned. They would then call in regularlyo I also took the opportunity to discuss any matters with the teacher which he or she Lhouyl~' may have some influencR nn thP result&. Tho respondents appeared conscientious in completinq the quP.st i onrnd re 'Ph@ m.tin problem encountered was the lack of literacy and some respondents required partfi of the questionnaire to be read to them.

The aim was to obtain 300 responses and 350 had been selected to ensure that result. On the days of administration some of the sample were absent and a fairly large number had in fact left school'" having either moved to another area or taken a job. One class at Hutt Valley Memorial Technical College was absent on the day I visited And as 10 of the claoa had been selected, I returned to the school on th,e 18th July, at which time 9 completed the questionnaire. Three hundred questionnaires were. completed, an 85% response rate. The administration of the questionnaire over two days was exhausting but considered essential.

There were two open-ended questions in the questionnaire, that is, questions which require comment, which I lai.:er coded, and the balance of the coding was contracted out to Urban Research Associates Ltd., finance being supplied by the University's Internal Research Committee. It v1a.s intended to analyse the results using the university computer and, when the questionnaires were coded, t.l:"e punch cards were prepared within the Univer:si ty"

At the same time as preparations were made for the administration of the questionnaire, information was being collected from the Youth Aid Section at Police Headquarters. Once a month the Lower Hutt Police Youth Aid Section forwarded a cqpy of all reports of action against offenders under the age of 17 who came to their notice. 'J'hese reports were reviewed a.nd details taken of all males under the age of 17 who came to Police notice for activities in a.ny way involving vandalism. In due course it is proposed to compare the official vandals with the unofficial vandals as revealed by the self-report study.

Sununarv In mid-1977 a self-report questionnaire, dealing mainly with vandalism and leisure activities, was administered to 300 school boys aged 14, 15 and 16 from the four state secondary schools in Lower Hc:tt. The idea~ to undertake such a stu.dy had emerged nearly two years previously from the Tnstitute's in-i:erest in both a self-report study and in vandalism as an aspect of violence. Ideas were sought from interested parties at an early stage. Then, and at all subsequent stages of the project, advice has usually been freely given from organisations and individuc,ls with expertise in some aspect of the resea.rch. 9.

The questionnaire used represented the conclusions of not only the pilot study, but also considerable discussion within the Institute and with many other individuals. We, within the Institute, came to the project with no experience in survey research and the experience has been a most rewarding one in a number of ways.

A continuing concern has also been the question of publicity. Acting upon th@ best advice we hnve not pnb.1.i C"ized our research until now. Th"ni hnvP been some .i nqniriPs from thP rnedi n bnt they hnv@ a1 .1 s;hown th@ pi!tienc@ we have requested from them. Our project has developed slowly but, we hope, thoughtfully. Methodology within the social sciences is a field which con­ tinues developing and we feel, that the care taken at all stages is reflected in the preliminary results which we are now able to present. 10.

~- Introduction

The 300 r,espo:t1dents [f na.rnely secor1dJ1r~l sci1oc1lboys a,9ec1 lt'.l: r; 15 ,,, 16 and a few aged 17 years, each completed a questionnaire which listed a ~otal of 106

a.ct:.s of rnisb.ehaviour ~

cornrn.i tted any one of these acts :..u tr.1.(3 past s:Lx ILl()I-:tths and I if so, ho·w often" a1_1hr

The forms of misbehaviour ranged in sericusness from minor breaches of school rules to serious criminal offences. five categories; category l - least serious, category 2 ~ less serious, category 3 - serious, category 4 - more serious, and category 5 - most serious.

1rhe activities .about 'Jilhich inforrn.ation 1;,,7,as s·o,ugh.t. and. the.ir seriot1sness 9r.adm ings are listed in Appendix A.

The rcau]ts discussed in this paper pertain to:

a., thc3 2 O xnost. frequent.ly ad.rni tti2,d act:s ·r .:;,1.nd

b., the 9 ,:::tcts in th,=: ~u1ost. seriOllS t (;ateqor?,,

rrhe respons,.2:s tc, t:.hec,f~ 2 9 Eic:t.s v,J'fJre: exarni1!,2d \l\"i th r,eg-.a):c:1. to thr.2e age, race, and socio-economic status (SES). distributed as follows:

J\ge __ ?..~ Rf""spondents_

%

14 121 40.3 !5 38 32 "7 16 70 17 8 LO 300 10\l. 0

Race of Resp::i::1dents

Race

l.. Je·w Zealand European 232 7~/ ·• 3 22 7@3 Pol~-{n(:::sian G British

i: 1h

1 0.3 300 100.,0 lL

•rable 3 Socio-Economic Status of Respondents Socio-economic status relating to occupation was assigned according to the Elley and Irving scale (1976). This is a scale nased on the father's occupation and is divided int.a six levels.

SES No. %

1 J'l 12.3 2 57 19.0 3 55 18.3 4 68 22.7 5 28 9.3 6 9 No answer 46 15.4 300 100.0

For analytical purposes the number of cateqories in each of these variables was reduced to three. It was hoped that the number of respondents falling within each of the categories would be sufficient to allow reliable results to be obtained. Firstly, the boys were divided into those aged 14 years, 15 years, and 16 & 17 years. The three racial groups were New Zealand European and British, New Zealand Maori and Polynesian, and 'other'. Socio- economic status groups 1 and 2, 3 and 4, and 5 and 6, were combined so as to form three groupings. The frequency with which each of the respondents had committed any of the 106 acts within the preceding 6 months, was also divided into three categories; never, 1-3 times, and often.

Chi-square tests were applied to each of the misbehaviours to investigate whether there was a significant difference in the behaviour of schoolboys of varying age, race and socio-economic status. rrhe null hypot:hesis stated that the age, race or socio-economic status of schoolboys made no difference to their behaviour pattern. It assumed that any apparent difference was merely due to chance in the sampling process and was not representative of the situation of the total population of schoolboys. The alternative hypothesis stated that there was a real difference in the behaviour of schoolboys of different ages, races and socio-economic statuses.

The chi-square test is essenti,Illy a comparison betv,reen actual frequencies and ,expected frequencies. The assumption underlying the calculation of the latter is that the proportion of schoolboys falling within any one participation category for a form of misbehaviour was the same for ea.ch of the sample and for the total respondents. The value of chi-square which ·was computed for each of the 87 contingency tables is given in Appendix B. Only those contingency tables which yielded a significant chi-square va.lue are shown below. 1 When-

1All tests were conducted at the 0.05 significance level for 4 degrees of freedom. The critical chi-square value at this level is 9.49. Due to the low frequencies obtained for some of the contingency tables, the chi-square test was rendered invalid. Not more than one in five of the expected frequencies should be less than 5 (Ebdon, 1977). For the purposes of the 3 x 3 contingency tables in this survey, ir more than 2 of the expected frequencies were less than 5, the chi-square test was taken as being invalid. 12. ever a misbehaviour was found not to differ according to age, race or socio­ economic status, the total response frequencies are given.

B. The Mo&t Frequently Admitted Acts The twenty most· frequent],.y admitted ac"ts are discussed below in an order of descending frequen~y .

.i • Wr:i t.i ng or scr.i hh] i ng on R schoo] desk. 'l'h.is behnvionr, the moi::;t frequently ndmitted, Jny within the .least serious cate9ory. The computed chi-square values were not. s.i gnif.i cant and so this form of behaviour was not found to differ with the age, race or socio-economic status of the respondents.

Table 4 No. %

Never 34 11.6 1-3 times 153 52.2 Often 106 36.2 293 100.0 ii. Broken school rules.· The second most frequently admitted misbehaviour. This lay within the lea$t serious category anli once again, the chi-$quare values were not significant. Table 5 No. %

Never 37 12.5 1-3 times 140 47.l Often 120 40.4 297 100.0 iii. Swore at people who got in your way. This offence was in category 2 o'f the seriousness gradings, the less serious type of behaviour. Again, the behaviour was not found to differ according to the three variables that were analysed. Table 6

No. %

Never 51 17.1 1 ... 3 times 158 52.8 Often 90 30.l 299 100.0 iv. Annoyed someone for a laugh; within the least serious category. Although computed chi-square value was not significant for age, this behaviour form was found to differ with the race and socio-economic status of the respondents. Table 7 Race

N. Z. European N.Z. Mao.cl Other •rotal Ii< British & Polynesict11 No. No'" No. No. %

Never 46 10 3 5 9 19 0 8 1-3 times 146 8 11 165 55.4 Often 62 10 2 74 24.8

254 28 16 298 100.0

Chi-square 10.71, significant, 4df, p 0.05

The siqnifi~Ant findinqs Are with New Zealand Maorie and othnr Polynesians. More than would be statistically expected 'never' partici­ pate in this act, less do so 'l-3 times' while there is a tendency for those who do annoy someone for a laugh to do so 'often'.

Table 3 SES

1 & 2 3 & 4 .5 & 6 Total No. No. No. No. %

Never 13 19 14 46 18.2 1-3 times 63 66 15 144 Often 18 37 8 24.9

94 122 37 100.0

Chi-square 15.85, significant, 4dfr p 0.05

Boys from SES 1 &2 have a tendency to undertake this activity occasionally, there being fewer in the "never' and 'often' groups than would be expected. Boys in SES 3 & 4 have a tendency to do this "often', while boys in SES 5 & 6 have a tendency "never' to participate in this activity. v. Made fun of a teacher, a least serious offence. Table 9 Age 14 yrs 15 yrs 16 & 17 yrs Total No. No. No. No. %

Never 31 10 23 64 21.7 1-3 times 60 57 38 155 5205, Often 30 30 16 76 25.8

121 97 77 295 100.0

Chi-square 11.85, significant, 4df, p = 0.05 Both the 14, and the 16 & 17 year olds indulge in this activity less than would be statistically expected. However, with the 15 yea.r olds there is a tendency to undertake it at least 'l-3 times" and for some of them to do so 'often'.

vi. Travelled on a bus or train without paying, a category 2, less serious offence, with no significant chi-square values. This suggests that travelling on public tran&port withn11t paying, an a~tivity admittP.d by nGarly 75% of th..i n,,;;[email protected].;, is w.idPsprPnct throughout t.hP. agRs, race a1.nd socio-

vii. Been kept in after school, the result of misbehaviour rather than misbehaviour in itself, rated least serious. 'Eable 11 Age

-i C'. 14 yrs .,.L J yrs 16 & 17 yrs Total No. No, No, No. %

2 C -, Never 19 20 40 79 0" l

1-3 times 81 66 .:J"' "'j 184 62o2 Often 21 11 1 33 lLl

121 97 78 296 HJO. 0

Chi-square 39.24, significant, 4df, p 0.05

This is a penalty which is less often incurred as boys grow older, but was not found to differ with the race or socio-economic status of the respondents, viii. Someone else picked a fight with you. This behaviour may in many cases not amount to offending, rated least serious. No significant chi-square values were computed. 'Fable 12 No. % Never 100 33.3 1-3 times 174 58.0 Often 26 8.7 300 100.0 15. ix. Played cards for money. A less serious offence admitted to approx- imately 60% of the respondents as to having occurred in the previous six months. Table 13 No. % Never 127 42.9 1-3 times 109 36.8 OftPn 2% 100.0

x. Wagged school. This behaviour was included in category 2, less serious, not perhaps so much because of the inherent deviousness of the behaviour but because truanting is often believed to be associated with other misbehaviour. Table 14 Age 14 yn:i "!"i yrR 16 & 17 yra Total No. No. No. No. % Never 67 43 21 131 44.4 1-3 times 45 40 41 126 42.7 Often 9 13 16 38 12.9

1 ').<. 7J. 96 78 295 100.0

Chi-square= 17.73, significant, 4df, p = 0.05

The results show that the 16 & 17 year olds have a tendency to wag

school, while the 14 year olds are less to \1,1asr school than statistically There were no chi-square values of icance by race or socio-economic status. xL Started a fight with someone. This behaviour is within category 2, less serious and the null hypothesis was confirmed. Table 15 No. % Never 148 49.3 1-3 times 131 43.7 Often 21 7.0 300 100.0 xii. Smashed a bottle on purpose in the street, a category 2, less serious offence. Table 16 Race N. Z. European N.Z. Maori Other Total & British & No. No. No. No.. % Never 121 9 2 132 45.l 1-3 times 101 14 13 Often 28 4 1 33 11.2

250 27 16 293 100.0 Chi-square 12.07, significant, 4df, p 0.05 16.

This table would suggest that New Zealand European and British have a tendency not to have undertaken this activity while the New Zealand Maori and Polynesian, and 'others' have a tendency to do so 'l-3 times'. The 'ofted responses are very close to the statistically expected results in all three categories. xiii. Made phone calls to kid someone, A category l, least serious offence. Tahle 17

l ~, 14 yrs 1"i yrs Hi & , I yr:m Total No. No,, No. No. % Never 56 38 50 144 49.1 1-3 times 50 40 20 110 37~6 lo Often 14 --J 6 39 13.3

120 97 76 293 100.0 Chi-square= 14.67, significant, 4df, p = 0.05

The older boys, 16 ~ 17 years, have a tendency not to participate

in this behaviour. The 14 year olds have a tendency to do ~ 1-3 times 1 while there was an over representation of the 15 year olds in both the '1-3 times' and 'often' categories. xiv. Got drunk, a category 3,serious offence. Significant results were obtained for both age and race. 'fable 18

14 yrs 15 yrs 16 & 17 yrs Total No. No. No. No,,. % Never 75 42 148 50.2 1-3 times 38 41 32 111 37.7 Often 7 14 15 36

120 97 78 29.5 100.0 Chi-square= 15.71, significant, 4df, p = C.05

These results would suggest that there is a tendency for the 15 year olds to have got drunk "1-3 times' and for a few of 16 & 17 year olds to have got drunk 'often'. It should also be pointed out that 50% answered 'never' and that what amounted to "getting drunk" was left to the subjective decision of the respondent. Table 19 Race N.Z. European N. Z. Maori Other Total & British. & :Polynesian. No. No. No. No. % Never 129 15 5 149 50.2

CJ 1-3 times 99 _;; 8 110 37,0 Often 25 10 3 38 12.8

253 28 16 297 100.0

Chi-square 21.1, significant, 4df, p = 0.05 For the New Zealand European and British respondent, the 'l-3 times" category was slightly higher than expected, For the New Zealand Maori and Polynesian, the number answering 'never' was close to the statistically expected number. However, for those New Zealand Maori and Polynesians who admitted getting drunk, thera wa& a higher proportion in tho 'often' category than would be statistically expected. xv. BPPn sent ont of r.1as8 for messing about, a category ] , !P.ast SP.Lions behavim1r on which no statistically significant variations were revea1P~. Table 20 No. % Never 152 5L4 1-3 times 119 40.2 Often 25 8.4 296 100.0

.1rvi , Wri tt0n nn tho wnl.1 n at nnhon.l " was among five questions dealing with writing on walls in various places. The next most popular place upon which to write were the walls at railway stations. Table 21 .Age

14 yrs 15 yrs 16 & 17 yrs Total No. No. No. No. % Never 51 47 54 152 5L9 1-3 times 52 42 22 116 39.6

Often 15 9 1 25 8 (I 5

,-,,-,, 118 98 I I 293 100.0 Chi-square 17.36, sig·nificant, 4df, p = 0.05 The oldest age group questioned, the 16 & 17 year olds, were less likely to have written on school walls than statistically expected, while there was a tendency for the 14 year olds to admit this behaviour ~-3 times' or 'often'. xvii. Pinched things from school. A category 4, more serious offence, it was the offence involving· dishonesty most frequently admitted. However, on the three variables tested, age, race, and socio-economic status, there were no chi-square values of significance. In other words the results indicated that the behaviour was not more or less predominant on any of these variables than could reasonably be expected by chance. Table 22 No. % Never 165 55.9 1~3 times 109 37.0 Often 21 7.1 295 100.0 xviii. Been to see an R.18 film, a category 1, least serious offence. Although some statistically significant results by the variable age may have been expected, this was not so. Table 23 No. % Never 169 56.7 1-3 times 90 30.2 Oft.en J9 LLl 29 G 100.0 xix. Driven a car without a driver's licence, a category 2, less serious offence. Table 24

14 yrs 15 yrs 16 & 17 yrs Total No. No. No. No. % NPVPr R.5 .? 8 Hi8 1-3 times 30 32 26 88 29.8 Often 5 11 23 39 13 .3

120 98 77 295 100.0 Chi-square 35.53, significant, 4df, p = 0.05

The 14 year olds participated less often than statistically expected, the 15 year olds as expected and more 16 & 17 year olds than expected acknowledged "often' driving without a driver's licence. xx. Pinched things from a shop when it was open, a category 4, more serious offence, and the last offence admitted to by more than 40% of the res­ pondents as having occurred within the previous six months. There were no chi-square values of significance on the variables tested. Table 25 No. % Never 176 59.7 1-3 times 100 33.9 Often 19 6.4 295 100.0

C. Seriousness It is proposed to give brief results for the nine activities considered to be the most serious types of offending about which details were sought. They are presented in the order of the most frequently to the least frequently admitted. Because so many of the respondents had never committed these acts, the low frequencies obtained in the "l-3 times' and "often' categories rendered all but one of the chi-square tests invalid. And in this case the computed chi-square value was not significant. Consequently, the tables presented here incorporate only the frequencies with which respondents of all ages, races and socio-economic statuses participated in these acts. 19. i. Stolen thing$ from car$. Table 26 No. % Never 250 86.2 1-3 time$ 25 8.6 Often 15 5.2 290 100.0 ii. Taken a motorbike for a joyride. Table 27 No. % Never 262 89.4 1-3 time$ 24 8.2 Often 7 2.4 293 100.0 iii. 'l'aken a car for a joyride. Table 28 No. % Never 263 89.8 1-3 time$ 24 8.2 Often 6 2.0 293 100.0 iv. Gone into a building !:lite and damaged machinery. Table 29 No. % Never 263 90.4 1-3 time$ 22 7.5 Often 6 2.1 291 100.0 v. Got money from other$ by !:laying you would beat them up. Table 30 No. % Never 274 92.9 1-3 times 14 4.7 Often 7 2.4 295 100.0 vi. Broken into a shop that Wa$ clo$ed and !:ltolen thing$. Table 31 No. % Never 275 93.5 1-3 time$ 16 ~.5 Often 3 1.0 294 100.0 20. vii. Gone into a warehouse or factory and stolen things. Table 32 No. % Never 273 93.5 1··3 times 13 4 .. 4 Often 6 2.1 292 100.0 viii. Broken into a houRR and stn]Pn things. Table 33 No. % Never 276 95.2 1-3 times 12 4.1 Often 2 Om7 290 100.0 ix. Takan hard drngn. Table 34 No. % Never 288 97.4 1-3 times 4 L3 Often 4 L3 296 100.0

D. Police Youth Aid Statistics As noted in section l of this paper details were taken of all male youths who came to the attention of the Lower Hutt Police Youth Aid Section for offending involving wilful damage, between J·anuary and June 1977 inclusive. All behaviour involving youths aged 16 years and under is the responsibility of the Youth Aid Section. When deciding what action to take they have a number of options available to them. On many occasions informal action, such as a warning or referral to another agency, is taken rather than formal action, depending of course on the circumstances of the case.

During the months referred to, 40 male youths, aged 6 to 16 years, came to the attention of the Youth Aid Section of the Lower Hutt Police Sub-District for activities involving vandalism.

Some details of these 40 youths: Table 35 Race No. % New Zealand European 24 60.0

')'7 c.' Maori 11 .;:., I"' J Polynesian 2 5.0 Other 3 7.5 40 100.0 2L

Table 36

C Age (years) No. 'i5 6-9 9 22o5 10-13 12 30.0 14 2 'J. 0 15 8 20"0 16 9 22.5 ilQ 100.0

Table 37 Occupation No. % Student 25 62.5 Employed 12 30.0 Unemployed 3 7.5 40 100.0

Of the total 40 boys only 3 were of the age and occupation studied in the current research project; two were aged 15 years and one, 16 years. All three were students 'Who were charged with wilful damage. Two of the boys damaged a number of letter boxes whilst the other was apprehended after damaging a school out of school hours. All the boys received a warning from the police.

One of the broad aims of the research was to provide some idea of the quantum of vandalism. At this stage it is possible to give some idea as to the number of boys who, during J·anuary - June 1977, committed an act for which, if apprehended, they could have been charged with wilful damage. It must be emphasized that this is only an estimate, not an accurate assessment.

The number of respondents who admitted any of the acts covered in the questionnaire which related to wilful damage were counted. Excluded from this number were those who admitted damaging or destroying school property. The questionnaire does not distinguish between minor and major daraage, and it is believed that most minor damage to or destruction of school property is usually dealt with internally by the school authorities.

A total of 228 of the 300 respondents, or 76%, admitted to wilful damage within the previous 6 months of property other than school property. •rhe Lower Hutt Police Youth Aid District also covers Wainuiomata, an area in which there are a further two state secondary schools. Checks with these schools suggest that there were approximately a further 475 school boys of the relevant age group in the Police District to be added to the 1539 from the 4 schools from which the sample was selected.

Accordingly, there were at least 2000 school boys within the rele­ vant age range in the Lower Hutt Police Sub-District. When the sample figures 22. were generalized to the total population, they indicated that approximately 1500 school boys, (75% of the total), committed at least one act of vandalisn~ between J·anuary - June 1977. Yet only three boys were apprehended, that is 1 in 500 of the estimated vandals.

E. Sununary The fl.1..sL ]!uiut Lu Le sL.tesset1 ls that the results from self-report

,;; Ludies du uoL p1.uvide all ctccu'tc1.Le dHd delo.lleL1 dccount of all offending within a. corrununily. They may i,,.tuvlue c1uequalu daLa fur groups but they do not provide sound data on an individual basis. It must also be noted that the behaviour of school boys in Lower Hutt need not necessarily be typical of school boys in other parts of New Zealand"

From the present survey it was apparent that many more school boys aged 14, 15 and 16 years conunitted vandalistic acts and some other minor offences than were known to the Police. 'l'his is not to suggest that ot:i:ending by school boys was frequent. In some cases only one act of wilful damage was committed within the six month survey period. However, had the boy been apprehended official action could have been taken. It was estimated that only one in 500 of the vandals was known to the Police.

The misbehaviour which was widespread among the boys tended to be of a fairly minor nature and frequently occurred at school. Out of school, shop­ lifting was the most frequently acknowledged of the more serious offences, with about 40% of the respondents admitting to this. Few admitted serious offending. •rhe respondents who admitted the most serious offences were so few in number that no conclusions could be drawn about such offending other than it was rare behaviour among schoolboys.

With regard to the twenty most frequently admitted misbehaviours, the most important conclusion was that seldom were there statistically significant variations by race or socio-economic status. With only three of the misbehav­ iours were race and socio-economic status found to have significant chi-square values. Even with these behaviours the conclusions did not show dramatic differences between the categories. The twenty most frequently admitted misbehaviours were committed by the respondents with little variation by race or class. In most cases the behaviour was just as likely to have been committed by a pakeha youth from a professional family background, as by a Maori or Polynesian youth frrnn an unskilled family background"

On seven of the twenty most frequently admitted misbehaviours, chi­ square values were of significance with regard to age" Four of the seven dealt with misbehaviour at school. In three of the four, with the exception of truanting, the 16 & 17 year olds, were less likely to misbehave. A tenta­ tive conclusion would be that 16 & 17 year olds were more likely to be at school out of desire rather than out o:E compulsion and consequently are less inclined to cause trouble at school" 'rhat such a conclusion must remain tentative is illustrated by the fact that no statistically significant variations were obtained for some of the misbehaviours studied which related 23. to school, e.g. pinched things from school, and been sent out of class for messing about.

'I'o conclude, nearly all of the 300 boys who completed the question­ naire acknowledged committing some of the 106 misbehaviours about which information was sought. F,e"'' acknowledged the serious offences. 'l'hero was some change of behaviour by age, but for the 20 most frequently admitted offences, the misbehaviour was spread throuqhout the races and socio-economic statuses. Offending by youths aged 14, 15 and 16 years is not an infrequent event, but offending is minor, episodic and each incident in itself is un­ likely to cause alarm. 24.

REFERENCES

Blalock, H.M. Social Statistics, 2nd ed, New York, 1972 McGraw-Hill.

ElJduu, Davld Statistics in Geography, Oxford, 1977 Blackwell.

Elley, W.B. and J.C. Irving "'Revised Socio-Economic Index for 1976 New Zealand", New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 11, 25-36.

Robb, M. and H. Howorth New Zealand Recreation Survey: Preliminary 1977 Report, Wellington, New Zealand Council For Recreation and Sport.

Stace, Michael Vandalism and Self-Report Studies : A 1978 Review of the

No. 6, Institute of 0 Victoria University, Wellington. 25~

APPENDIX A

1. Least Serious

Been to see an Rl8 film,. Tried to get into Rl8 film without success. Knocked on a doer and run away, Rung at a door and pretended to be delivering a messaye. Made calls to kid smneone. Kicked over a dustbin. Emptied rubbish out of a dustbin for a laugh. Locked a toilet door and climbed out. Made fun of a teacher. Told a lie to a teacher. Been sent out of class for messing about. Been kept in after school. RrnkG"n :asrhon.-! rn.l "'~ Annoyed someone for a laugh. Someone else eked a fight with you. Just hung around with a tough gang. Messed up a lifL Written or scratched on your desk at school. Broken a desk or chair at school.

2. Less Serious

Travelled on bus or train without paying. Played cards for money. Put bets on horses. Got into the pictures without paying. Driven a car without a driver's licence. Ridden a motorbike without a driver's licence. Wagged school. Sworn at a teacher. Started a fight with someone. Sworn at people who got in your way. Made fun of a in his presence. Smashed a light bulb in a block of flats. Smashed a light bulb in the street. Smashed a light bulb in school. Smashed a light bulb in a park. Smashed a light bulb in a c1ubo Written on the walls in a block of flats. Written on the walls in the street,, Written on the \fl1alls at school. Written on the walls in a club. Let off a fire extinguisher at school. Let off a fire extinguisher in a block of flats. Let off a fire at a club. Less Serious continued

Let off a fire extinguisher on a train" In a toilet damaged a seat. In a toilet damaged pipes or taps.

In a toilet damaged i"l Wi'lh?r tank. In a toilet damaged a vJash basin.

Inside i1 train ripped Llle seats. Inside a train broken things. Inside a train pulled the emergency cord for a joke• On a bus ripped the seats.

On a. bus written on the seats or the walls. In a park pulled up plants or trees. In a park damaged park buildings.

3. Serious

Got drunk. Smoked pot. Dialled 111 for a joke. Let doi,m the tyres of someone else's bike. Been in gang fights. Smashed a light bulb in railway station. Broken a window or mirror on purpose in an empty building. Broken a window or mirror on purpose in somebody's house. Broken a window or mirror on purpose in a block of flats. Broken a window or mirror on purpose at school. Broken a 'Window· or mirror on purpose in a club. Broken a window or mirror on purpose in a public toilet. Broken a vlindow in a railway station. Written on the walls at a railway station. Smashed a bottle in the street. Smashed a bottle at school. Smashed a bottle at a club. Smashed a bottle in a park .. Smashed a bottle in a block of flats. Scratched a car or truck. Broken the aerial. Broken a street lamp. Smashed the glass in a bus shelter. Damaged street signs. Smashed the glass in a telephone box. Got money out of a telephone box. Gone onto a building site and smashed bricks. Gone onto a building site and broken down walls. Dropped something damaging on a. train. Knocked off bricks etc., from a building sits. Pinched things from your friends. Pinched things from home. 7.

4. More Serious Set fire to rubbish in a dustbin. Let down the tyres of a car or motorbike. Damaged part of a lift. Damaged the tyres of a car or truck. Pinched badges or caps from a car or truck. Taken out traffic signs or roadworks equipment. Damaged the phone in a telephone box. Put damaging things on the rai tracks. Pinched things from a shop when it was open. Pinched from school. Broken into a slot machine.

5. Most Serious Taken hard drugs. Gone onto a building site and damaged machinery. Broken into a shop that was closed and stolen things. Stolen from cars. Got money from others by you would beat them up. Taken a car for a joy ride. Gone into a warehouse or factory and stolen Broken into a house and stolen Taken a motorbike for a joy r.ide. APPENDIX B

Chi-square values

All tests were conducted at the 0.05 significance level with 4 degrees of freedon1o Only those computed vo.lues which exceeded the critical chi-square value of 9.49 were significant. These are underlinecL

The 20 most frequently admitted acts. Chi-square values Race SES i. Writing or scratching on a school desk 4.59 L48

ii. Broken school rules 2.91 5.85 4. 71

iii. Sworn at people 5., 68 1. 98 3" 82

iv. Annoyed someone for a laugh 4.75 10.71 15.85

v. Made fun of a teacher 11. 85 2.0 7.06

vi. Travelled on bus/train without paying 4.18 4.47 5~59

vii. Been kept in after school 39.24 invalid 3., 33 viii. Someone else picked a fight 7.14 2.81 5,38

ix. Played cards for money 4.61 6.57 5.19

x. Wagged school 17.73 3.45 2,, 62

xi. Started a fight with someone 7" 68 L03 6.80

xii. Smashed a bottle on purpose in the street 0.56 12.07 5 "30 xiii. Made phone calls to kid someone 14.67 8.60 5.38

xiv. Got drunk 15.71 21.10 7.02

xv. Been sent out of class for messing about 3.78

xvi. Written on walls at school 17.36 2.09 4.58 xvii. Pinched thin9s from school 4.81 2.08 8.46 Chi-square values Race SES xviii. Been to see R 18 film 3" 50

xix. Driven a car without a licence 5. 71 L97

xx. Pinched thinqs from a shop 7. 96 1. 43

The 9 acts in the 'most serious' category~

i. Taken hard drugs invalid invalid invalid

ii. Gone onto a building site and damaged machlne.r:y lnvu.liu lnvctlill i.nvulid

iii. Been into a shop that is closed invalid invalid invalid

iv. Stolen things from cars 1.24 invalid invalid

v. Taken a motorbike for a joyride invalid invalid invalid

vi. Taken a car for a joyride invalid invalid invalid

vii. Got money from others sayL,g you would beat them up invalid invalid invalid

viii. Gone into a warehouse/ factory and stolen things invcilid invalid

ix. Broken into a house and stolen things invalid invalid invalid