Preface - 1992 Texas School Survey of Drug and Alcohol Use

8/14/2019 Preface - 1992 Texas School Survey of Drug and Alcohol Use

1/14

INTRODUCTIONThe Texas school Survey of Drug and AIcohoI tlse is sponsored by the Texas commission onAlcohol and Drug Abuse (TCADA) and implemented 91ttre Public Policy Resources Laboratory(ppRL) at Texas A&M university. The T)xas school survey project is conducted in two parts'The frst involves a statewide survey administered

about every two years in a sample of districtsthroughout the state. The statewide survey helps inform poricymakers about the extent and natureof the substance use problem in Texa, ,rrrooi.. It also gives disrictS conducting local surveysa standard of comp#son for interpreting their own drug and alcohol survey findings'The second component of the Texas school Survey makes drug and alcohol surveys available foradministration in individuar school districts. ^rhe Texas school Survey is offered annually toevery school district in the state. TCADA partially s9nl.o.ffi tltt"-1it-Ti^t;1eve1 administrationsby absorbing the cost of instrument deveiopment, tunoing the preparation of the executivesummary of local results, and providing state survey data as a basis for interpreting localfindings. A locat administration of the"Texas School Survey of Drug and Alcohol Use wasconducted in your school district during Spring of ,rgg2.

your locar survey results are presentedin this repofr along with findings from the statewide survey'Organization of the RePortThe report is divided into tfuee major sections. part I, District Results, contains a set of tablesand marginals summarizing the ,""orrJuty and (if applicable) elementary survey data for yourdistrict. part II, State Results, is bound u, u "o-p*ion volume. It contains a complete set offigurescomparingyourlocalsurveyresultstothestatesurveydata,aswellasasetoftablesandmarginals presenting state results in the same format as youriocal report' Finally' the ExecutiveSummary contains icustomized written synopsis of the iocal survoy resurts. A full report on thestatewide survey proj"a will be published uy rcno'L in the fall of 1992' This

state sufveyreport will providi a detailed ,o***y of cunent 5e1ds in drug use for Texas as a whole' AcopywillbeforwardedtoyourdistrictaSsoonasitisprinted.prior to presenting the results, there are a number of important points which should be consideredwith regard to the'data cited in this report. These ittt"j relate both to the 1992 statewide surveyas well as to the district-level data. ihis section briefly presents some basic information aboutthedevelopmentofthereportandthelimitationsofthedata.BACKGROUNDoNLocALSURVEYADMINISTRATIONThe Texas school surttey is offered for students in grades four through twelve' Two versions ofthe instrument have been developed to accommodate both order and younger students. Districtswere also asked to limit survey adminisffation to one of a fixed set of grade combinations' wewill briefly describe the elementary and secondary survey instruments and review acceptablegrade combinations below'


2/14

The Texas School Survev InstrumentTwo versions of the Texas School Survey are available. The first, a six-page questionnairedesigned for secondary students in grades six through twelve. All sixth'graders participatithe statewide survey used the secondary survey instrument. However, in local administrasixth graders could be given the elementary or secondary survey depending on the preferenthe district. The secondary survey instrument explored usage patterns of 11 drugs incltobacco, alcohol, inhalants, marijuana, cocaine, crack, hallucinogens, uppers, downers, steand ecstasy. Other questions pertained to behavioral and demographic correlates of subsuse, problems relating to substance use, and sources of information about and help for substrelated problems.A simplified three-page instrument was created for students in grades four through six.an effort was made to keep the questions basically similar to the secondary survey, thewere adapted to be more easily understood by younger respondents. For example, languagsimplified wherever possible, students were asked about fewer drug alternatives, andcomplex questions were omitted.Standard Grade CombinationsIn order to make state and local comparisons of substance use across all grades, both theand local aggregato percentages must be based upon the same combinations of gOtherwise, state and local data will be comparable by individual grade but overall scores cbe compared directly. Because the state survey data was run in only a limited number ofcombinations, districts were encouraged to administer their local surveys in the samegroupings. They were as follows:

Elementarv4 through 64 through 5

Secondarv7 through 126 through 129 through 128, 10, artd 126, 8, 10, and 12

If your district did not survey one of the above grade combinations, be aware that you cacompilre your district results to the state data by individual grade. Where districts choseother combinations of grades, no comparable overall percentages for the state data are avaThis will be an especially critical issue for small districts who only receive aggregate dat


3/14

LIMITATIONS OF THE DATAWhen interpreting the state and local survey findings cited in this report, it is important to beaware of a number of subtle factors which can have a major bearing on the meaning of the data.It is prudent to temper conclusions with an understanding of issues such as sampling error andthe limitations of self-reported data. It is also important to be sensitive to the precise populationto which findings can be generuTized. Knowing who was not incladed in the survey can be asimportant as knowing who was included. In the following paragraphs, some of the mostsignificant caveats relating to both the statewide and local findings will be discussed.Survey PopulationIn generalizingthe results of the state and local surveys, it is impor0ant to be aware that the datawas collected in public schools. Neither private school students nor drop-outs were sampledthough both represent significant components of the youthful population of Texas. Theselimitations should be kept in mind when considering the implications of the data. The findingsdo, however, represent reasonable estimates of drug use among the public school population ofTexas, and offer a suitable basis of comparison for public school districts.Self-Report DataThe drug and alcohol use data is entirely based on self-reported information. While a numberof studies have estabiished the usefulness of self-reported information for estimating the incidenceand prevalence of drug use, the validity of these data ultimately depends on the truthfulness,recall, and comprehension of respondents. This study was carefully designed to minimize theimpact of these potential sources of error. For example, students who reported impossibly highlevels of substance use or use of non-existent drugs were eliminated from the analysis. Further,differences in recall or comprehension are assumed to be constant across both the state and localsurvey samples. Any reporting bias in the data should therefore be approximately equal in bothsurveys and comparisons between district and state data should be valid. Nonetheless, thelimitations of self-reported information should be considered in drawing conclusions about thedata.Sampling ErrorThe 1992 statewide survey data presented in this report is based on a sample of Texas secondaryand elementary students. Because a sample rather than the entire population of students wassurveyed, a certain amount of error will be introduced when generalizing findings from thesample to the population. To gauge the size of this error, confidence intervals for all estimatesmust be ascertained. A complete discussion of sampling error for the state survey sample, alongwith confidence intervals for each substance included in the survey, will be available in the statesurvey report to be produced this fall. In general, however, small differences of a few percentagepoints will usually not be statistically meaningful. Attention should be focused on largedifferences of five percentage points or more.


4/14

_ANALYTIC GUIDELINESIn processing the drug and alcohol survey data, there were a number of analytic issues thato be addressed' These included questions such as how to identify students whoexaggerating their drug or alcohol use, how best to calculate average substance use figures,to handle surveys from students in grades that were not technicatt-y ueing surveyed and hoclassify data for students who failed to report their grade level. This seJtion will review sdecision rules estabrished to deal with theie matterslHandling of ExaggeratorsAs was discussed above, the survey data presented herein is based entirely upon respondedescription of their own behavior. It is inevitable that some students will under- or over-retheir use of drugs or alcohol. To the extent possible we attempt to identify and eliminatefrom those respondents. Two checks were incorporated into the data analysis program to idenexaggerators' First, data from students claiming to have used ozz. a non-existent drug,considered suspect and dropped from the analysis. Second, students claiming impossiblylevels of drug or alcohol use were also dropprd fro- the analyses.lWeighted Aggregate DataIn many districts, the percentage of all enrolled students that actually take the survey vasubstantially by grade. Though patterns are different for each districf rypically a laproportion of younger stl dents complete the survey compared to their older peers. If a simaverage is taken when calculating overall levels oi'u.", older students may not be represenin proportion to their numbers. sitr." these are the very students most liicely to use drugsalcohol' their underrepresentation in the aggregate scores would result in artifrcially lower ovelevels of substance use.To achieve more representative percentages when calculating overall or aggregate levelssubstance use, a "weighted average" procedure was used. prior to calculating the averagscores for each grade surveyed were weighted by the total enrollment for that grade.weighting averages by actual enrollment, over- or under-sampling in aggregate scores is partiaalleviate d.Surveys From "Out-of-Range" Gradesoccasionally, students from a grade that was not technically being surveyed were included indistrict sample. This was primarily a problem where the survey was administered in a no

'unbelievably high substance use for secondary surveys was defined based on the tbllowing criteria:students reported in item z0 that they had five or more drinks of two or more beverages every day; (2) studereported in item 16 that they used 3 or more alcoholic beverages every day; or (3) students reported in item 13 tthey used4 ormore drugs (other than cigarettes, alcohol, oriteroids) ll ormore times in thepast30 days.


5/14

contiguous grade combination (e.g., 8, 10, and 12). In these instances, the final sample oftencontained a few students who were in "out of range" grade levels. Generally, data for thesestudents was not thrown out. Rather, it was re-coded and included with the next contiguousgrade 1eve1. A conservative approach was used whereby younger students could be grouped withIh"it old"r peers, but older students could not be re-coded to a lower grade. This preventedartificially high levels of substance use in lower grades.There were two cases in which the "out-of-range" data would be dropped from the analyses ratherthan being re-coded: (1) if there was no contiguous higher grade with which to combine thedata; and (Z) ifthe number of respondents in "out-of-range" students was greater than 10 percentof the grade with which they were being grouped. This latter measure was designed to preventa large number of "out of range" grades from obscuring the true grade-level values.Surveys In Which No Grade Level Was ReportedWhen students failed to roport their grade level it was not possible to determine unequivocallywith what grade these students' data should be analyzed. Where grade level was missing,students' data was retained in the sample and an estimate of grade was made based on his or herage. Students that were at age level for beginning a grade were included with that grade. Gradeassisnments were made as follows:

Aee9

1011t2L3T41516Il+

Grade Level4th grade5th grade6th grade7th grade8th grade9th grade

10th grade11th gradel2th grade

If both grade and age were missing, the data was dropped from the analyses.

CONCLUSIONWe have presentd an overview of the Texas School Survey project, discussed limitations of thesurvey daia, and reviewed the key analytic issues. In the next section of this report, attention willbe focused on the survey findings. The section will be introduced by a brief discussion of themajor issues relating to the presentation of the data. Survey results are then presented in theform of figures, tables, and marginals.


6/14

OVERVTEW OI THE DATAThe Texas school Survey findings for your school district are summarized in this section ofthe report. survey findings *" pr"r"tt"d in three formats: figures, tables, and marginals'Figures portray both state and local survey results in a "side-by-side" fonlat' allowing fordirect comparisons to be made. There are a total of twenty figures, ttrglef all of these couldnot be produced for every school district. The rules for determining which figures weregeneraied for each district are described in Standards of Data Presentation, below'Three sets of tables are available. The first set containing Tables 1-22 illustrates generalinformation about substance use patterns in the district. The second set, Tables A1-A3, refersspecifically to students' uso of alcohol. The third set, Tables 1-14, contains prevalence tablesshowing the percentage of students who have used specific drugs or alcohol in the past 30days, past school yeai, ana during their lifetimes. All tables were available for everyparticipating district. Tables showing the same data for the state are provided in a companionvolume. Additional data is presented in the marginals' Marginals contain the rawpercentages of students who gave each responso option for ali questions' Bear in mind that ifyou,. Oisf,ict under-sampled a-particular g.uO"(t) your overall percentages will represent,,weighted avorages." As a reiult, the raw percentages presented in your marginals mayreflect weighted counts rather than actual raw counts.We have produced all the graphics which could be generated for your district' Whenreviewing the survey findings, there are a number ol points which should be considered' Inthe following p*ugruphs we will provide an overview of the data and discuss some of thestandards of preseitation used in producing the local survey findings' Finally' theconventions used in the presentation of results will be reviewed.

STANDARDS OF DATA PRESENTATIONA wide variety of school districts took part in the T,exas school survey of Drug and AIcohoIIJse. In order to accommodate the diversity of participants, guidelines for organizing andpresenting the data had to be established. th.." included standards for handling data fromsmall and mid-sized districts and for determining which tables and figures should be producefor each. These guidelines win be reviewed bel-ow. The sources of data for each table andfigure will be documented as well'Data AggregationIn some districts; too few students were surveyed to allow for reliable grade-level analyses tobe performed. Where this occurred, data from several grades was grouped together' Gradegroupings were established so as to (1) maximize the number of valid between-groupcomparisons possible and (2) plotect students' confidentiality. one of three possible data


7/14

presentation formats was selected for each district, depending on the number of students pergrade. The guidelines used are illustrated in Table I-1.In districts where the number of students per grade varied widely, a format was

selected based on the size of the mnjori4r of grades surveyed. However, if one or moregrades fell below a total of 30 students, the next lower level of aggregation was automaticallyselected.2

2The only exception to this rule was in the case of medium districts in which some of the grades beinggrouped together contained fewer than 30 students. As long as the total number of students in the group was at least90, then the data was presented in the standard format for medium districts (i.e., aggregated in grade groupings).

HIGH SCHOOL Small: Fewer than

Table I-1. Guidelines for Data AggregationDISTRICT SIZE GRAPHICS F'ORMAT

A single percentage is30 students per grade shown representing allstudents.Medium: 30 to 90students per grade Percentages afe aggfegatedin grade groupings (e.g.,combining grades 6-8 and

grades 9-12).Large: More than 90 Separate percentages arestudents per grade shown for each grade level

surveyed.

ELEMENTARY Small: Fewer than A separate percentage is90 students per grade shown for all students.Large: More than 90 Separate percentages arestudents per grade shown for each grade level

surveyed.


8/14

Table I-2. Availability of Figures byDistrict Size and Elementary/Secondary Status

ElementarvLarqe Small'/ ./*t/ *J/,/ INS*J/ INS,/ INS*J/ INS,/ ,/NQ NQNQ NQNQ NQNQ NQNQ NQNQ NQ/r/,/ ,/*J/ *Jt',/ Jl*/ *J/NQ NQNQ NQ

SecondarvLarse Medium SmallFigure IFigure 2Figure 3Figure 4Figure 5Figure 6Figure 7Figure 8Figure 9Figure 10Figure 11Figure 12Figure 13Figure 14Figure 15Figure 16Figure 17Figure 18Figure 19Figure 20

,/,/,/,/,/,/,/,/,//,/,/./,/,/,/{,/,/,/

,/ ,/,/ ./,/ INS,/ INS,/ INSJl INS,/ ,/,/ ,/,/ ,//,/'/ ,/,/ ,/J/ ,/,/ ,/,/ ./,/ ,/,/ ,/,l/ *,/ ,/,/ INS

KEY:,/ Graphic is available.*J/ Graphic is available in a modified form that is not directly comparable to the sesurvey.INS Graphic is not available because of insufficient sample size.NQ Graphic is not available because the question on which it is based was not asked


9/14

Availability of GraphicsThere are two factors which determined what graphics were produced for a district: (1) thesize of the district, and (2) whether elementary grades were surveyed. This section reviewshow these factors affect the tables and figures each district received.

Table I-3. Item Numbers for QuestionsServing as Sources of Data for Figures

Figure 1Figure 2Figure 3Figure 4Figure 5Figure 6Figure 7Figure 8Figure 9Figure 10Figure 11Figure 12Figure 13Figure 14Figure 15Figure 16Figure 17Figure 18Figure 19Figure 20

Elementary SurveySource Item11T2111211t210NANANANANANAr6L71l/172311,22123NANA

Secondary SurveySource Item

t7t9I7t917t916I6243Ia3lb32baaJJ2728a-JIa-JIT9/3735OS

KEY: NA Figure is not available.OS Data derived from 1990 NIDA survey


10/14

Table I-4. Item Numbers for QuestionsServing as Sources of Data for Tables

Table 1Table 2Table 3Table 4Table 5Table 6Table 7Table 8Table 9Table 10Table 11Table 12Table 13Table 14Table 15Table 16Table 17Table 18Table 19Table 20Table 2ITable A1Table A2Table ,A.3

Elementary SurveySource Item

1111NAtUt2T2l413NANANAru20,21NA3lL3NANANAL718NA22t2315NANA19

r,3,5,6,7,rU12

Secondary SurveySource Item

t6t6t7t7lr91920I42l2329f29e19t30313l2r32 a,c,e,g32 b,d,f,h^J353634a-)t222526

PrevalenceTables B1-14 1,3,5,7,1'1,r8,19,35

10

KEY: NA Table is not available.


11/14

District Size. The number of students surveyed in large or medium-sized districts was largeenough to produce every available graphic. However, according to the data aggregation rulesoutlined above, graphics illustrating data by grade could not be produced for districtssurveying fewer than 30 students per grade. As a consequence, Figures 3 through 6, all ofwhich show grade-level breakdowns, are omitted from both the elementary and secondaryversions of reports for small districts. With these exceptions, all other figures and tables areproduced for every district regardless of size.Elementary vs. Secondary Graphics. So that comparisons can be easily made between olderand younger students, elementary and secondary graphics have corresponding table and figurenumbers. However, they are not always directly comparable. Some graphics are notavailable for elementary students because they are based on questions not included on theelementary survey. In other instances, elementary graphics are available, but only in amodified form. For example, because only secondary students were asked about theirsubstance use in the "past 30 days," a different time frame (e.g., "past school year") wassubstituted for the elementary versions of those graphics. Also, while secondary tables andfigures provide information about eleven substances, elementary graphics are limited to onlyfour -- tobacco, alcohol, inhalants, and mariiuana.Tables I-2 and I-3 illustrate which tables and figures are available for small, medium, andlarge districts. They also show differences in graphics for elementary and secondary grades.Data SourcesIt is not always clear from looking at a figure or tabie exactly where the data it representscame from. Table I-4 illustrate the survey items that served as data sources for each graphicpresented.CONVENTIONS USED IN DATA PRESENTATIONThroughout the report, a number of conventions were adopted to maintain consistency inreporting. Across all tables and figures a common terminology was employed and a standardset of symbols was used. In the following paragraphs, we will describe these terms andsymbols. We will begin with a set of general definitions followed by a discussion of specificconventions used in tables and marginals. Finally, we will provide a brief explanation of afew selected graphics depicting relatively complex relationships between variables.DefinitionsThere are several terrns used throughout the report which, though seemingly straightforward,may have some bearhg on how you understand and interpret the data. These are outlinedbelow.


12/14

Alcohol. When the category "Alcohol" appears in a figure or table, it represents thecombined use of beer, wine, wine coolers, and liquor. Each of these alcoholic substancesmay be referenced individually, as well.Cocaine or Crack. This reference is found only in the prevalence tables (Tables B1-B14)refers to students that report using either cocaine or crack, or both cocaine and crack. Sincthere is some overlap between students who have used cocaine and those that have usedcrack, the percentages of respondents in the "Cocaine or Crack" category should not be asimple sum of percentages in the individual "Cocaine" and "Crack" categories. It should,however, be at least as large as the larger of the two individual categories.Illicit Drugs. These are defined as controlled substances. They include marijuana, powdercocaine, crack, uppefs, downers, hallucinogens, and ecstasy.Mariiuana Only. This reference is found only in the prevalence tables (Tables B1-B14).refers to students that report using marijuana b:ut no other illicit substances. The reference"Marijuana," in oontrast, includes all students using that substance regardless of whether theused other substances or not.Prevalence. The percentage of students that report having used a substance or substances.Tobacco. The category "tobacco" includes the combined use of cigarettes and smokelesstobacco. This represents a change from the coding strategy used in the 1988 and 1989 TexSchool Surveys which only included cigarettes in the tobacco category.Conyentional Symbols and FormatIn addition to figures, there are three types of tables in which data may be presented. Thesinclude general substance use tables (Tables l-20), alcohol tables (Tables A1-A3) andprevalence tables (Tables B1-B12). Data is also available in its raw form in the marginals.Here we will present several conventions of data presentation. They apply chiefly to tablesand marginals.The Meaning of an Asterisk (*). When an asterisk appea-rs in a table in place of apercentage, it typically means that (a) the actual percentage obtained was less than 0.5 percor (b) fewer than 10 students responded to that item. Asterisks may also appear if data is navailable for a district. This would be the case, for instance, if a district did not survey allthe grades in one of the standard acceptable grade combinations (see "standard GradeCombinations" in the previous section).Never Used/Ever Used Notations. In Table 1 of the general substance tables and in allalcohol and prevalence tables, a standard approach is used for presenting incidence andprevalence information. An "Ever lJsed" category shows the total porcentage of students wsay they have used a substance at all, regardless of when or how many times. A "Never

12


13/14

IJsed" category shows the total percentage of students who have never used a substance. Thepercentages shown in the "Ever [Jsed" and "Never lJsed" categories always sum to 100percent.Additional columns then provide further information about those students who say they have"Ever lJsed" the substance. This includes information such as when or how often useoccurred. These additional columns always sum to ttre total percentage of students in the"Ever lJsed" category. Conversely, the sum of students in the additional columns and thosewho say they have "Never fJsed" a substance is also 100 percent. For example, looking atthe prevalence tables (Tables 81-14), the percentage of students who used any givensubstance in the past month, past school year, and prior to the past school year total thenumber in the "Ever Used" column. That number added to the total percentage of studentsin the "Never Used" column equals 100 percent.Marginals. As was noted above, the marginals illustrate the raw percentage of students whoresponded to each survey item. Frequency, porcent, cumulative frequency, and cumulativepercent are shown for each individual response option. The frequency shows the absolutenumber of students who gave the indicated response. The percent is the frequency convertedinto a porcentage of all students who answered the question. Again, bear in mind that if yourdistrict under-sampled a particular grade(s) your overall percentages will represent "weightedaverages." As a result, the raw percentages presented in your marginals may reflect weightedcounts rather than actual raw counts.The cumulative scores for frequency or percent show how those numbers increase in anadditive fashion across all response options. Cumulative scores are primarily useful in surveyquestions with continuous response categories (e.g., 1 day, 2-3 days,4 or more days). Thecumulative figure makes it possible to quickly determine the number or percentage of studentswho fall above or below a given cutoff point.The number of students who did not answor the question is indicated in the marginals by asmall dot on the frst line of data for each survey item. Surveys that were excluded fromanalyses as exaggerators are not included in the marginals.Review of Selected GraphicsThe majority of figures and tables presented in this report are self-explanatory. Most graphicsdepict state and local survey findings in a straightforward format. However, there are a fewfigures and tables which show slightly more complex relationships between variables. Thefollowing paragraphs will briefly identify and explain these graphics.Figure 8. Average Number of Experiences with Inhalants (Grades 7 and t2). The numbersshown in Figure 8 illustrate the average number of times all students reported using specificinhalant substances. The category "Total Experience" indicates the average number of timesstudents have used any inhalant substance, regardless of the type.

13


14/14

Figure 75: Prevalence of 30-Day Use Among Students Saying Variaus Substances AreVery or Not Very Dangerous To Use. This figure illustrates actual levels of currentsubstance use among students who believe particular substances are very dangerous comparto those who feel they are not very dangerous. The percentages shown represent the numbof students in each of those categories who report having used the substance at least onceduring the past 30 days.Figure 17: Prevalence of 30-Day Substance [Jse Among Secondary Studen* by ParentaAaitude. This figure shows actual levels of students' beer and marijuana use by perceivedparental attitude. The "Approve" category is comprised of students who said their parents"strongly" or "mildly" approved of adolescents using those substances while the "Disapprovcategory is comprised of students who said their parents "strongly" or "mildly" disapproved"Neither" and "Don't Know" remain as independent categories. Thepercentages shown represent the number of students in each of these groups who reporthaving used beer or marijuana at least once during the past 30 days.Figure 20: Prevalence of Lifetime Substance Use Among Seniorc - Natinnal vs. Local.This figure compares substance use among the seniors in your district with actual levels ofsubstance use reported among seniors nationally. The prevalence rates for seniors nationallwere derived from the 1990 National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) survey.Table 12: 30-Day Prevalence of Use of Selected Substances by (a) Absences Due to lllneor Other Reasons and (b) Conduct Problems. This table illustrates the relationship betweesubstance use and absenteeism or conduct problems among students. The percentages showrepresent the number of students who report having used alcohol, inhalants, or marijuana inthe past 30 days. Table 12a shows variation in substance use among students who have nomissed school versus those who have missed school from one to four or more days. Table12b shows variation in use among students who had not experienced conduct problems atschool versus those who had experienced conduct problems from one to four or more days.The 1992 state survey data indicated that students who report higher absentism or moreconduct problems are also more likely to report having used drugs or alcohol during thepast 30 days.

I4

Date post:	30-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	texas-school-survey-of-drug-and-alcohol-use
View:	218 times
Download:	0 times

Preface - 1992 Texas School Survey of Drug and Alcohol Use

Documents