Preventing School Vandalism and Improving Discipline

A Three-Year Study
  • G. Roy Mayer
  • Tom Butterworth
  • Mary Nafpaktitis
  • Beth Sulzer-Azaroff
Part of the The Springer Series in Social Clinical Psychology book series (SSSC)


School vandalism, a complex problem area of extreme social importance, is increasing in magnitude. Nationwide, over 5,000 assaults on teachers are reported each month, and over $500 million is spent each year to repair damage done by school-aged vandals (National Institute of Education, 1978). It was reported in a recent Los Angeles County School Attendance and Welfare Bulletin (Note 1) that in school districts throughout Los Angeles County the average vandalism costs were in excess of $8.5 million for the 1978–1979 school year, a 56% increase over the 1977–1978 school year. Additional indirect expenses are incurred by school districts for insurance, security guards, and other presumed deterrents to vandalism. These expenses appear to exceed the cost of repairing the effects of vandalism. The Los Angeles Unified School District’s Security Section, for example, had a budget of about $10 million for personnel salaries alone, an increase of nearly $4 million since 1978.


Junior High School Apply Behavior Analysis Behavior Analyst Teacher Behavior Control School 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Reference Notes

  1. 1.
    Attendance and Welfare 1979–80. Bulletin, No. 35. Downey, Calif.: Office of the Los Angeles County Superintendent of Schools.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Project PRIDE Progress, I (1) (whole number). Burlingame, Calif.: 1976.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Azrin, N. H. Aggressive responses of paired animals. Paper presented at the symposium on Medical Aspects of Stress, Walter Reed Institute of Research, Washington, D.C., April 1964.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mayer, G. R., & McGookin, R. B. Behavioral consulting. Downey, Calif.: Office of the Los Angeles County Superintendent of Schools, 1977.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Butterworth, T. Strategies for reducing violence and vandalism. Project REVIVE. Office of the Los Angeles County Superintendent of Schools. An ESEA, Title IV-C Innovative-Developmental Grant, September 1979.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nafpaktitis, M., Mayer, G. R., Butterworth, T., & Jones, J. Implementing project REVIVE: Workshops and guidelines. Downey, Calif.: Office of the Los Angeles County Superintendent of Schools, 1980.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jones, J., Mayer, G. R., & Butterworth, T. REVIVE: Reducing violence and vandalism in education. (ESEA Title IV C #3969), Downey, Calif.: Office of the Los Angeles County Superintendent of Schools, 1978.Google Scholar


  1. Azrin, N. H., & Holz, W. C. Punishment. In W. A. Honig (Ed.), Operant behavior: Areas of research and application. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966.Google Scholar
  2. Azrin, N. H., Hutchinson, R. R., & Hake, F. F. Pain-induced fighting in the squirrel monkey. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of behavior, 1963, 6, 620.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernhardt, A. H., & Forehand, R. The effects of labeled and unlabeled praise upon lower and middle class children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1975, 19, 536–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cossairt, A., Hall, R. V., & Hopkins, B. L. The effects of experimenter’s instructions, feedback, and praise on teacher praise and student attending behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973, 6, 89–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gee, J. S. Community schools: Sunnyvale action against delinquency. Crime Prevention Review, 1974, 1, 25–32.Google Scholar
  6. Greenberg, B. School vandalism. Its effects and paradoxical solutions. Crime Prevention Review, 1974, 1, 1–5.Google Scholar
  7. Hopkins, K. D. The unit of analysis: Group means versus individual observations. American Educational Research Journal 1982, 19, 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Horton, L. E. Generalization of aggressive behavior in adolescent delinquent boys. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1970, 3, 205–211.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kaplan, P., Kohfeldt, J., & Sturla, K. It’s positively fun. Denver, Colo: Love Publishing Co., 1974.Google Scholar
  10. Mayer, G. R., & Butterworth, T. A preventive approach to school violence and vandalism: An experimental study. The Personnel and Guidance Journal 1979, 57, 436–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. National Institute of Education. The safe school study. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, 1978.Google Scholar
  12. Siegel, S. Nonparametric statistics for behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.Google Scholar
  13. Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Mayer, G. R. Applying behavior analysis procedures with children and youth. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1977.Google Scholar
  14. Thomas, J. D., Presland, I. E., Grant, M. D., & Glynn, T. Natural rates of teacher approval in grade 7 classrooms. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1978, 11, 95–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Wahler, R. G., & Fox, J. J. Setting events in applied behavior analysis: Toward a conceptual and methodological expansion. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1981, 14, 327–338.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ziesel, J. Stopping school property damage. Boston: American Association of School Administrators and Educational Facilities Laboratories in collaboration with City of Boston Public Facilities Department, 1976.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Roy Mayer
  • Tom Butterworth
  • Mary Nafpaktitis
  • Beth Sulzer-Azaroff

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations