WltllllmNHIWHWMHUN!“HIIlHHllHlHHl

132
693
THS

  

   

mcmem sure my“

W/Iifl/llfl/llll/fI/fl/l/I/l ’l

I//; ////I//£’27/////I///I W

1293 01707 4265

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

A Descriptive Profile of Youth Gang
Members in the Lansing School District

presented by

Michelle May

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

M.S. degree in Criminal Justice

 

 

WW

ril“

, \—
£ v -

Major professor

3/623

Date

 

0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Oppommity Institution

 

 

‘ [LIBRARY

i Michigan State
University

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX
to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.

 

DATE DUE MTE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1/98 chlRCchtoDmpGS-p.“

A DESCRIPT IVE PROFILE OF YOUTH GANG MEMBER
CHARACTERISTICS IN THE LANSING PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM

By

Michelle Elizabeth May

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

School of Criminal Justice

1998

ABSTRACT

A DESCRIPT IVE PROFILE OF YOUTH GANG MEMBER
CHARACTERISTICS IN THE LANSING PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM

By

Michelle Elizabeth May

Despite decades of research and vast amounts of literature,
little insight is offered regarding gang membership characteristics.
Rather, much of the literature focuses on theories of why adolescents
join and participate in gang activities.

This research was undertaken in an attempt to discover if
identified gang members have common characteristics. Demographic
and behavioral data was analyzed on 105 students identified as gang
members, a profile of common factors was created, and professional
literature published on gangs was referenced to validate the findings.

Questions this research attempted to answer were: 1) Are there
similar characteristics in the majority of known or identified gang
members in the Lansing School District? 2) Do these characteristics
parallel those characteristics noted in published literature? 3) If
similarities exist, can a profile be developed to be used as an
assessment tool to identify at-risk youth? The research found that
common characteristics exist in the identified gang members, and the

literature confirmed the characteristics to be valid.

Dedicated to my Family
Dad, Mom, Mike,

Grandma and Grandpa

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

My deepest and sincerest thank you to my thesis advisor, Dr.
Kenneth Christian. Without his guidance, encouragement, criticism,
persistence, and patience, I would not have finished this project. He
challenged me to reach my goals.

I would also like to thank Dr. Sheila Maxwell for the time and
effort she gave to this project. Thank you to Vince Hoffman for his
input. Thank you to John Grant and Lee Mason, Lansing School
District, for allowing me to undertake the project and providing me
with the data needed.

Many thanks to my parents and twin brother. Their support
and encouragement were paramount in the completion of this project

and throughout the entire process.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................. v ii

CHAPTER ONE-INTRODUCTION

Introduction ............................................................................................... 1
Statement of the Problem .................................................................... 3
Purpose ......................................................................................................... 4
Need for the Study .................................................................................. 4
Research Questions .................................................................................. 5
Summary and Overview ....................................................................... 5

CHAPTER TWO-REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction ............................................................................................... 7
Definition ..................................................................................................... 8
Youth Gangs: An Overview ................................................................ 12
Summary of the Literature ............................................................... 18

CHAPTER THREE-METHODOLOGY

Introduction ............................................................................................ 2 0
Method ....................................................................................................... 2 1
Strength of Gang Affiliation .............................................................. 2 3
Limitations ............................................................................................... 2 5
Analysis ..................................................................................................... 2 6
Confidentiality ........................................................................................ 2 6
Summary .................................................................................................. 2 7

CHAPTER FOUR-RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Introduction ............................................................................................ 2 8
Variable Tabulations ........................................................................... 2 9
Comparison to Literature Published ............................................. 3 4
Profile Review ........................................................................................ 4 2
Conclusion ................................................................................................. 4 2

CHAPTER FIVE-SUMMARY OF RESEARCH
Introduction ............................................................................................ 4 4
Conclusion ................................................................................................. 4 5

Recommendations for Further Study ........................................... 45

Implications for Practice .................................................................... 46
APPENDICES

Appendix A — Letter from Lee Mason .......................................... 48

Appendix B - Subject Profile ............................................................ 49

Appendix C - Letter from David E. Wright, Ph.D ....................... 52
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................... 53

vi

Table

Table

Table

Table

LIST OF TABLES

4.1 - Gender by Ethnicity ......................................................................... 29

4.2 - Gang-Affiliated Individuals Projected Ages

At the Beginning of the Study .......................................................... 30
4.3 - Projected Graduation ....................................................................... 32
4.4 - Incident Reports Per Offense ....................................................... 33

vii

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Introduction

School and community officials have become increasingly
aware of the growing youth gang population as more adolescents
become members of gangs and as more gang activity is seen on and
around school grounds. Due to the increase in youth gang activity,
gangs within the school system have become an important issue for
our nation’s schools. Kay McKinney (cited in Gaustad, 1990) wrote:
“Although youth gangs have existed in the cities of the United States
almost as long as the nation itself, trends during the last two decades
have alarmed school and community officials.” Although many
entities such as parents, schools, churches, police, to name a few, are
concerned about the phenomenon of youth gangs, little research has
been initiated investigating the connection between demographic and
behavioral characteristics and gang involvement. Do gang members
have common background characteristics? What factors do gang
members have in common?

Data released in 1991, by the United States Department of
Justice, revealed that students attending schools with gangs were
more likely to avoid restrooms or hallways and other areas inside

the school, than areas outside the building. Students attending

2

schools with gangs were also twice as likely as students from schools
without gangs to be afraid of being attacked, both at school and on
the way to or from school (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1991).

In 1991, the National School Safety Center News Service
reported that schools have been concerned about youth gangs for
several reasons, the most significant being that schools are a prime
recruiting ground. Since younger gang members and most potential
gang members attend schools, they provide the opportunity for
interaction and possible recruitment of new members.

In the 1994 Gallup Poll Survey conducted for Phi Delta Kappa
International, a professional education fraternity, of the 1,326 adults
polled, 18% named the growth of fighting, violence, and gangs as
their main concern. More non-whites than others were concerned
about fighting, violence, and gangs with 31% listing them a top
problem.

Therefore, a critical issue confronting school officials today is
the need to develop gang education programming for staff, students,
and parents. In order to develop prevention and intervention
education, more must be known about the type of students who are
joining gangs and those students at risk of recruitment and
membership. This research attempts to answer these questions.
Data on identified gang members and profiles on their characteristics
will be compared with the available research to answer the
questions: Are there similar characteristics present in the majority of
known or identified gang members in the Lansing School District? Do

these characteristics parallel those characteristics noted in the

3

literature published? If there are similarities, can a profile be
developed to be used as an assessment tool to identify at-risk youth?

Being involved in a gang is not a crime, but research has
significantly demonstrated that youth affiliated with a gang show
higher levels of delinquent activity and drug involvement than other
youth (Fagan, 1990; Esbensen et al., 1993). Crimes stemming from
gang activity include drug abuse and trafficking, theft, vandalism,
and murder.

The school bears a strong responsibility to curb the gang
situation that presents itself in order to uphold the purpose of the
institution and the safety of staff and students. In Michigan, the law
requires children to attend school until their sixteenth birthday.
Youth spend up to eight hours a day in school, not only making
school grounds a prime recruiting center for gang membership, but
also opening the door for gang education programs.

Statement of the Problem

Although gang research is abundant, minimal information is
available concerning characteristics of youth involved in gangs.
Recent efforts have been made to discriminate between gang and
non-gang youth (Esbensen et al., 1993). As a result of limited
research in this area, many questions arise. This research attempts
to answer the question, do individual gang members have similar
characteristics?

The primary focus of this research was to utilize demographic
and behavioral data provided by the Lansing Public School District --
personal characteristics, family characteristics, school behavior, and

geographic location -- and compare that data, once compiled, to

4

available research on gang characteristics. Can the characteristics
found in identified gang members in the Lansing School District be
validated by available research?
Purpose

Youth gang activity has become a major issue permeating all
facets of our communities and more importantly our institutions of
learning. Throughout the past decades, many studies have
concentrated their efforts on adolescent gangs. Despite the mass of

gang literature, few researchers have focused their efforts on gang

members’ characteristics. The abundance of literature focuses its
concern on gangs as a group. The present research analyzes
individuals and characteristics they exhibit. The fact that this topic

has not been extensively explored makes this study relevant in
broadening our understanding of the type of child at risk of gang
recruitment or membership.

This research is three-fold: 1) Compile data collected on 105
students in the Lansing Public School District identified as gang
members; 2) develop a descriptive profile of common factors seen in
these 105 cases; and 3) review available research in an attempt to
validate the characteristics profiled.

Need for the Study

There is a need to develop a profile on youths known to be
involved in gang activity. Gang presence in school has raised
questions of safety and control and has established feelings of fear
among students and staff. To address this problem, an attempt has
been made to determine the factors which these gang-involved

youth have in common. School personnel are in need of such

5

information on the common characteristics of gang-involved youth in
order to successfully develop programs to reduce the number of
youths entering gangs. By reducing the number of gang-involved
youth, schools are hoping to diminish many of the problems caused
by the presence of gangs.

Anyone can be recruited to join a gang. Demographic and
behavioral data on known gang members will provide school officials
with an ethnography of characteristics seen in gang members within
the Lansing School District.

Research Questions

The questions this research attempts to answer are: 1) Are
there similar characteristics present in the majority of known or
identified gang members in the Lansing School District? 2) Do these
characteristics parallel those characteristics noted in the literature
published? 3) If there are similarities, can a profile be developed to
be used as an assessment tool to identify at-risk youth?

Summary and Overview

This chapter has laid the groundwork for the study. A review
of the literature on gangs, which has been an area of interest since
the beginning of the century, will be provided in Chapter Two. The
confusion surrounding the definition of the term gang will be
highlighted. The methodology as well as the limitations faced during
the collection of data will be presented in Chapter Three. The results
and analysis of the comparison and collection of data will be
presented in Chapter Four. In Chapter Five, the study will be
summarized, and implications and recommendations for further

study will be provided.

6

In summary, the purpose of this research is to: develop a
profile using data collected on 105 students previously identified as
gang involved; compile literature published on youth gang member
characteristics; and, compare the research to the profile to validate
the findings. This information will provide an assessment tool for
educators as a beginning step in addressing the gang situation in the
schools. This information will be used to educate staff, parents, and
students for development of prevention and intervention programs.

Programs of this nature are desired due to the increased threat
these gangs bring to society and the impact these threats have within
the educational setting. “Students cannot learn if they do not feel
safe. No matter how you define safety, emotional or physical, it is a
necessity in both the school and the classroom” (Burke, 1991). Gangs
do not only threaten the safety of students, but the staff are victims
of fear as well. Stover (1987) stated that gang members are
disruptive and their presence is intimidating to both teachers and
students. This poses a threat to the ability to maintain order and

security.

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

“Today’s violent delinquent is a displaced person,
suspicious, fearful, and not willing or able to establish a
concrete human relationship. The formation of the
violent gang, with its impermanence, its possibilities for
hollow glory, its limited expectations of any responsibility
on the part of its members, is all-inviting to youths who
have difficulty fitting into a more integrated and clearly
defined world” (Yablonsky, 1962).

Despite decades of study, juvenile gangs are still far from being
an understood phenomenon. Criminal justice, psychological, and
sociological literature contain numerous studies of the youth gang
dating back to the beginning of the twentieth century (Thrasher,
1927) when it became the primary focus of the Chicago School
Sociologists in the 19208. Nearly a century has passed and perhaps
the most relevant issue that can be derived from the literature is the
lack of research pertaining to gang member characteristics. Are
there factors, demographic, behavioral, and geographic, that
predispose an adolescent to be at-risk of becoming involved with or

recruited by a gang?

Definition

Before reviewing the research, it is beneficial to establish a
clear definition of the term “gang.” A perusal of available research
reveals a plethora of definitions. Richard Ball and G. David Curry
(1995) examined how “various researchers and theorists have fallen
into various errors of logic in use of these methods and how gang
research and theory might make more consistent progress through
clarification of the definitional issues.” They conclude that gang
research and theory would benefit and progress if the term was
consistently defined and the logic of definition was examined.

Researchers, social institutions, as well as law enforcement
personnel have yet to reach a consensus and every organization that
comes in contact with “gangs” creates an operational definition to suit
its purpose. This lack of definitional consistency has hindered the
ability to generalize from one study to the next, while making it
difficult to assess the impact of youth gangs. “Historically, it is
difficult to document the extent and seriousness of gang delinquency
on a national level. The definition of a gang or gang activity varies
not only among sociologists but also among police and youth
workers” (Bookin-Weiner & Horowitz, 1983).

Frederick Thrasher (1927) was one of the first to attempt to
define the adolescent gang. He defined a gang as a group that
originally formed spontaneously, but beCame cohesive when conflict
occurred. He characterized gang behavior by confrontations
occurring face-to-face, milling, moving together as a unit, conflict,

and planning (Bartollas, 1993).

9

Arnold P. Goldstein and Ronald Huff, editors of The Gang
Intervention Handbook (1993), state that a youth gang is: “a
collectivity consisting of adolescents and young adults who, a)
interact frequently with one another; b) are frequently involved in
illegal activities; c) share a common collective identity that is usually,
but not always, expressed through a gang name; and, (I) typically
express that identity by adopting certain symbols and/or claiming
control over certain ‘turf’ (persons, things, or economic markets).”

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
(1994) cites the following list as being used in defining a gang for
research purposes. The group must exhibit: l) formal organization,
2) identifiable leadership, 3) identified territory, 4) recurrent
interaction, and 5) engage in serious delinquent behavior.

The National Crime Prevention Council (1994) states that

experts have compiled a number of characteristics that make a youth

vulnerable to gang membership. Gang members often:

- are male, although females are also recruited;

- have other family members or friends involved with gangs;

- have seen excessive use of alcohol or other drugs in the
home;

- live with a single parent or grandparents;

- have poor academic performance;

- see poor to non-existent job prospects;

- are known for fighting and general aggressiveness in early
adolescence, or have chronic delinquency problems;

- experience poor living conditions or poverty;

- have experienced social deprivation or isolation; and,

- have needs that have been neglected or unable to be
fulfilled.

In an attempt to develop a consistent definition, some
jurisdictions in the state of Florida have defined gang members by

statute. One particular statute declares a youth or street gang as a

10

group, formal or informal, that consists of two or three persons who
have a common name, signs, colors, and symbols and have members
who individually associate in youth and street gang activity
(Cromwell, Taylor, & Palcios, 1992).

The popular 1950’s musical, West Side Story (1958), brought
the term gang into a different light. The two noted gangs, the Sharks
and the Jets, were groups of rebellious teenage boys out to defend
their turf through fighting and violence, although weapon use was
not present at this time.

Lewis Yablonsky (1959) saw the gang as a “near-group
structure” which consisted of three levels of membership. The core
contained the leaders who needed and wanted the gang and
provided the gang with cohesion. The second level consisted of youth
who were not consistently part of the gang, meaning they belonged
and participated in activities when they chose. The youth at the
third level rarely identified themselves as gang members but often
participated in gang activity.

FJ. O’Hagan (1975) had similar thoughts but claimed that gangs
had four levels of membership. First were the “t0p men” who were
the leaders of the gang. These men were highly respected and well-
known within the gang as well as outside the gang. Second were the
“committed members” who related closely with the leaders. Third
were the “fringe” members who would partake in gang activities but
felt no type of commitment toward the gang. Last were members
termed “drifters.” These members differ from the fringe members in

that they are at times completely apathetic to all gang activity.

11

Carl Taylor (1990) has made an impressive and significant
impact on gang research with his recent research on gangs in the
Detroit area. Taylor has classified gangs into three categories:
scavenger, territorial, and corporate. Scavenger gangs lack a purpose
other than their impulsive behavior and their need to belong. They
have no particular goals, no purpose, no substantial camaraderies.
The majority of members come from the lower and the underclass.
Territorial gangs claim territory as being the gang’s and their
objective is to protect their turf from outsiders. When scavenger
gangs become serious about organizing, with specific goals in mind,
they enter the territorial stage. The corporate/organized gang
revolves around illegal means of making money.

Although many definitions are available, the Lansing Public
School District recognizes the definition employed by the National
School Safety Center (1992). This organization defines a youth gang
as a group of three or more people with a unique name, categorical
marks or symbols, who claim territory or turf, who associate on a
regular basis, and who take part in criminal or antisocial behavior.
This will be the operational definition for the purposes of this
research.

Our nation’s gang problem continues to worsen, which
emphasizes the need to block the cycle of youth becoming involved.
Movies such as Boyz in the Hood (1991) and New Jack City (1991)
detail gangs in a far more violent manner where drugs and weapons
are paramount. They glamorize the gang life. Monster (Scott, 1993),

a book written by a former gang member about his gang life as well

12

as his life in and out of the criminal justice system, is a first of the
books telling today’s youth the “real” story behind gang life.
Youth Gang Research: An Overview

Dale Hardman (1967) identified five overlapping periods in
gang research: the pioneer studies (1900-1930), the depression
studies (1930-1943), the war years: the factor studies, (1940-1950),
the descriptive studies (1942-1962), and the decade of theory
(1950-1960). Chicago School sociologist, Frederick Thrasher, initiated
a study of the youth gang in 1927, entitled The Gang: A Study of
1,313 Gangs in Chicago. According to Thrasher, adolescent boys were
born into play groups which were natural occurrences for those who
lived in the same neighborhood and attended the same school.
Thrasher also saw these gangs as being organized in three concentric
circles with the inside circle being the leader and his lieutenants, the
middle circle the full-time members, and the outside circle consisting
of those who were occasional members. The depression studies
developed focus on social factors with studies by Clifford Shaw and
Henry McKay (1942). Hardman describes the war years and the
“decade of factor studies: the why of gangs.” Glueck and Glueck’s
(1950) study found delinquency to be “highly correlated with
ganging.” The descriptive studies, the how of ganging, focused on
gang dynamics. William Foote Whyte’s research (1943) during this
time studied gangs over a three year period, resulting in the
conclusion that formation occurs gradually and that the leader of the
gang was held in high regard and importance. During the decade,

gang research was explained in numerous ways by a variety of

13

researchers. To understand this era, theories will be addressed in
more depth.

During the 1950’s and 1960’s, social theories emerged. Albert
Cohen’s perspective was detailed in his book Delinquent Boys (1955).
His theory stated that delinquency is an end result, a “reaction
formation,” of frustration individuals feel when they cannot reach
the goals or the societal norms they desire. Cohen based his theory
of delinquent subcultures on the belief that lower class adolescents
experience frustration or strain when they cannot obtain middle
class culture goals; therefore, their membership in a gang provides
status for them.

Another highly regarded theory of that period was Shaw and
McKay’s “Social Disorganization Theory” which saw gangs as groups of
adolescents who were socially deprived. Therefore, delinquent
behavior and gang involvement was a reaction to the slum and lower
class conditions around them. They proscribed the sequence of
events as follows: living in a socially deprived neighborhood leads to
failure of informal controls, which leads to increased gang activity,
which results in cultural transmission of delinquent traditions, which
ends in increased delinquent activity (1969).

Other theorists who supported the lower class subculture
theory were Richard Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin (1960). They
contended that gang membership results when adolescents, who are
lower class, cannot upgrade their economic standing and, therefore,
join one of three gang subcultures: criminal, conflict or retreatist.
The criminal subculture bases its action around criminal values, and

being involved in illegal activity is accepted in order to gain

14

economic success. The conflict subculture features violence where
members gain reputation or achieve status by forceful action or
threats of force. The retreatists are mainly involved in drug activity.
These three subcultures help the lower class youth obtain illegally
what they cannot gain legally.

In 1967, Malcolm Klein, took gang theory in a different
direction. He based his theory on the idea that adolescents go
through turmoil during the transition from childhood to adulthood.
Therefore, gang membership satisfied needs during this
developmental stage. Following the same line of thought, James
Short (1968) felt that gangs were an occurrence for adolescent males
who were of the lower socioeconomic class. It was during the period
termed “adolescence” that males needed to bond with peers of the
same sex and gangs met that need.

Travis Hirschi’s Social Bond Theory (1969) connected

delinquent activity to the quality of bond that the adolescent holds

with society. If this bond is weakened or broken, delinquent
behavior results. His theory was based on four elements:
attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief. The stronger the

attachment is to others, the stronger the bond will be which, in turn,
weakens the bond to any delinquent thought. If the individual is
committed to himself or herself and is willing to put forth effort into
appropriate activities, he or she will refrain from delinquent
behavior. If these youth are spending time committing themselves
to appropriate activities, they will have little time to consider
deviant events. In conclusion, delinquency is the result of a lack of

belief that the child has in the values of laws and the legal system.

15

If at any time, one of these bonds to society weakens or breaks,
delinquent behavior is more likely to occur.

Walter Miller (1975) agreed with Cloward and Ohlin (1960) in
that gang membership is an issue of the lower class. Miller argues
that lower-class individuals face a challenge of staying out of trouble.

Miller’s theory revolves around six focal concerns of the lower class:

trouble, physical prowess, smartness, excitement, fate, and
autonomy. These focal concerns can be interpreted for gang
behavior. Gangs usually establish norms which often include illegal

activity. Toughness is also desired by those gangs who fight to
defend their turf. If a gang member has the ability to outsmart
another, this is valued in the gang’s attempt to gain material
possessions. Gangs are often involved in “exciting’ and fast-paced
activity which provides the adolescent with thrill, danger, and risk.
By conforming to the belief that fate controls life events, youth
believe that luck will help them escape lower class life. Therefore,
gang members may gamble on activities, illegal or legal, because they
feel they will be lucky. Lastly, by joining a gang, adolescents may
feel that they are expressing their independence from such controls
as the school and the family.

When looking for research in the 19703, the abundance was not
apparent as it had been for previous decades. “By the 19703,
however, interest in gangs had become passe and some wondered if
gangs had met their demise” (Bookin-Weiner and Horowitz, 1983 as
cited in Esbensen & Huizinga, 1993). Gangs in the 1970s and 19805
expanded and encompassed more violent activities. Gang members

tended to be male, fall between the ages of ten to twenty-one, and

16

come from low income communities. These individuals were also
predominately African-American and Hispanic. The 19808 brought
forth crack cocaine which led the gangs to compete for the drug
market (Bartollas, 1993).

C. Jack Friedman and colleagues (1975) produced a study
entitled “A Profile of Juvenile Street Gang Members.” The study was
designed to profile Philadelphia gang youth. It contained 536
subjects with 49% reporting they had been gang members and 48%
stating they were currently gang-involved. Due to this study’s
relative proximity to the present research, it will be examined in
more depth in Chapter IV.

James B. Sibley (1989) examined gang violence and the
response of the criminal justice system, the “current nature and
scope of gang activity and the frustration of police and prosecutors in
coping with the rise of gang violence.” He also explored the California
Criminal Justice System and its response.

During the same decade, research continued to grow on the
response by the courts to this growing dilemma. Maxson and
company (1985) reported on the differences between gang and
nongang homicide. Conclusions revealed measurable differences in
ethnicity, age, number of participants, and relationship between
participants.

Merry Morash (1983) found that “the level of peer group
organization was not a sufficient condition to stimulate delinquency
among members.” She also stated that gang members were only

slightly more involved in criminal activity than other youth not

17

involved with a gang but who were also characterized as “high rate
serious offenders.”

Johnstone (1983) indicated that delinquent involvement is a
precursor to gang membership. He also stated that members and
recruits had a significantly higher score for serious delinquency than
did the non-gang involved youths. This was also documented ten
years later (1993) in Esbensen and Huizinga’s research involving the
Denver Youth Study.

Gangs in the 19908 continue to change. Today, the nation is
seeing a rise in the number of urban street gangs, gangs in small
communities, and female participation as well as female gangs
(Bartollas, 1993). Critical research in the 1990’s has been conducted
by Esbensen, Huizinga, and Weiher (1993) concentrating on the
differences between youth who are involved in gang activity and
youth who are not. This research has been done with data collected
from the Denver Youth Study which is a longitudinal study
examining families. Research found that differences do exist
between gang and non-gang youth. “Compared to gang members and
street offenders, non-offenders can be described as reporting: lower
levels of commitment to delinquent peers; higher commitment to
positive peers; lower lever of normlessness in three different
contexts (family, peer group, and school); and less negative labeling
by teachers and lower tolerance to deviance.”

As of August 1994, “in 110 jurisdictions reporting gangs, the
survey found that over the previous 12-month period there were:
249,324 gang members, 4,881 gangs, 46,359 gang related crimes,
and 1,072 gang-related homicides (Curry et al., 1994).

18

Other research of the decade focuses on gangs and delinquent
behavior (Thornberry et al., 1993), gang and drugs (Klein et al., 1991,
Fagan, 1989 and Hagedorn, 1994), and gang involvement among
ethnic groups (Curry & Spergel, 1992).

Summary of the Literature

Despite the abundance of material written on youth gangs and
gang behavior, research is lacking in the area of identification of gang
member characteristics. Researchers continue exploring the etiology
of gang involvement, but the urgency seems to focus on who is
joining or is susceptible of recruitment.

Early theory supported a lower class culture premise basing
gang membership on low social economic status; it considered gang
involvement to be a male experience and saw minorities as being
more apt to be gang-involved. Recent research has shed light on
differences between gang and non-gang youth, and theory supports
an integrated approach stating gang membership is caused by a
number of contributing factors: family, school, and economic status.
Most agree that gang activity is not only rapidly increasing and
spreading to smaller cities, but is also becoming more violent. As
more youth become susceptible to this lifestyle, school personnel
must seize the opportunity to reach the at-risk population. Los
Angeles District Attorney, Ira Reiner, stated, “Simply put, we have to
get kids before they get into gangs. . . . Once they are caught up in
the violent world of gang culture, they are, for the most part, lost
forever” (1989).

Despite the fact that the field is lacking research on gang

membership, studies exist which provide direction. Primary

19

research conducted in this area was done by John Johnstone (1983)
and more recently by Esbensen et al. (1993). Johnstone (1983)
addressed the issue of gang recruitment which examined how gangs
recruit and how those adolescents who are recruited differ from
those who are not. He noted that gang recruitment was impacted by
three factors: community characteristics (geographic location); social
and institutional attachments; and definitions of self. Esbensen’s
study in 1993, which centered around the Denver Youth Study,

explored differences between gang and non—gang youth.

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

Introduction

School officials have become increasingly aware of the growing
youth gang population as more adolescents are lured into gang
membership. This research will explore the possibility that gang
members have common characteristics. The questions that were the
premise of the study are as follows: 1) Are there similar
characteristics present in the majority of known or identified gang
members in the Lansing School District? 2) Do these characteristics
parallel those characteristics noted in the literature published? 3) If
there are similarities, can a profile be developed to be used as an
assessment tool to identify at-risk youth?

This research examines existing demographic and behavioral
data made available by the Lansing Public School District Department
of Public Safety. The study was broken down into three components.
First, data on 105 gang-involved students was collected according to
the four variables chosen by the researcher. The 105 students were
chosen based on the Department of Public Safety’s records on
students whom they had identified as gang-involved. Second, that
data was examined for commonalities or patterns from which a

profile was devised. Lastly, the researcher turned to professional

21

literature to compare the profile with published gang research. It is
presumed that the conclusions can be used to develop gang
prevention and intervention programs.

Method

The researcher chose to examine the following characteristics

in order to determine if commonalities existed in the 105 subjects:
1) Personal Characteristics
a) sex
1) female
2) male
b)age
c) race
1) Caucasian
2) African-American
3) Asian
4) Latino/Hispanic
5)other
2) Family Background
a) parental status
1)8ingle parent family
a) living with mother
b)living with father
2)living with two parents
a) natural parents
b)one natural parent and one stepparent
3)living with a guardian
4) other
b) parental occupation
1) unemployed
2) unskilled labor
3) skilled labor
4) homemaker
5) unknown
c) parental education
l)completed elementary school
2) completed middle school
3) attended high school
4) graduated from high school
5) attended college
6)graduated from college

22

7) post graduate
8) unknown
(1) sibling gang involvement
3) School History
a) school incident reports
b) school status
1 ) still enrolled
2) dropped out
3) graduated
4) transferred
a) in from another district
b) out to another district
4) Geographic Location

The existing data consists of student records of individuals who
were and are currently enrolled in the Lansing Public School District
who have been identified by the Lansing School District Department
of Public Safety to be gang-involved. To be identified as gang-
involved, the student must exhibit at least two of the following

characteristics:

- having gang tattoos;

- wearing gang garb including clothing of a certain color, types
of clothing, head coverings or specific methods of grooming;

- displaying gang symbols or markings on personal property;

- possessing literature that indicates gang membership;

- admitting gang membership;

- being arrested with known gang members;

- attending gang functions or gang sponsored functions;

- identification of a youth as a gang member by a reliable
informant;

- identification of a youth as a gang member by another law
enforcement agency;

- exhibiting behavior fitting police profiles of gang related
drug dealing;

- being stopped and identified by police while in the company
of known gang members;

- loitering, riding or meeting with known gang members;

23

- selling or distributing drugs for a known gang member;
and/or
- helping a known gang member commit a crime.

Strength of Gang Affiliation

A youth possessing one of these characteristics is known to the
staff as a gang “wanna be.” These youths typically engage in “gang
activity” in an attempt to be identified as a gang member but are not
associated with any formally organized gang. A student who exhibits
two to four characteristics is classified as an “associate/affiliate”
member, meaning he is known to be a gang member and a strong
likelihood exists that he will engage in illegal activity. If five or
more characteristics are identified, the individual is then described
as a hard-core gang member. The hard-core member is completely
engulfed in the gang and may even be a leader.

This list of characteristics and the strength of gang affiliation
are well-established criteria. These criteria have been used by the
San Diego Sheriff’s Department for the past decade. The Lansing
School District acknowledged this list of identifiers when they began
their gang identification process less than a decade ago.

Once a school staff member has identified that a youth has
exhibited at least two of the above-named characteristics, that
student’s name is given to the Lansing School District’s Department of
Public Safety (DPS). This begins a process of investigation to prove
or disprove the suspicion of gang involvement. When the
investigation ceases and there is enough information to determine
that the student is gang-involved, his name is placed on a list of

“identified gang members.”

24

Variables on personal characteristics, and the family
characteristics, of identified gang-affiliated individuals were accessed
through the Lansing Public School District DPS computer system. The
information is provided by self report by each student at the
beginning of each year. The information is coded and appears on one
screen except for the sibling information. To obtain this additional
information, to ascertain whether or not siblings had been involved
in gang activity, it was necessary to look at the addresses and cross-
check them to see if there were any matches. If matches existed and
siblings were identified, background checks were done to determine
if the sibling(s) had been identified as gang-involved while in school.

Variables on school history were collected in various stages.
The school incident reports were retrieved using the DPS computer.
Variables on school incident reports were collected through the
Lansing School District’s Student Services records. These records are
stored downtown and are not computerized. The process consisted of
going through each individual file and recording the information
manuaHy.

To evaluate the geographic location, addresses of the youth
involved were collected and mapped on a Lansing city map.

In order to compare the profile that the researcher established
to professional data, literature was reviewed extensively. In
researching gang member characteristics or gang member profiles,
little specific research was found. The researcher utilized articles
written on the general topic of youth gangs starting in 1970 until

1996.

25

Limitations

The researcher was confronted with several limitations and
obstacles with collecting original data. First, all records requested at
the beginning of the study were not provided. Records included
delinquent and criminal records, attendance records, and grades.
Further information on disciplinary referrals was also requested but
never received. Second, the study was limited by the fact that no
records or any type of documentation are kept on the gang
characteristics which lead to the students being “labeled” as gang
members. Students must exhibit at least two of the fourteen above-
named characteristics to be identified as a gang member, but, once
school personnel ascertain that a student exhibits at least two of
these above-named characteristics, those characteristics are not
noted.

The student’s name is given to the Lansing School District’s
Department of Public Safety so an investigation can be done to either
prove or disprove the claim of the student’s gang affiliation. The
Department of Public Safety does not keep records of the
characteristics the school security staff has identified the student as
having which resulted in their name being put on a list to be
investigated. Because of this, neither the researcher nor the
Department of Public Safety can assess the strength of the student’s
gang affiliation. So, although the Department of Public Safety is
defining strength of gang affiliation, it serves no purpose without
proper documentation being kept or used.

Third, incident reports kept between the years 1989-1993 are

recorded on microfiche, but the specific type of violation is not.

26

Therefore, the researcher can identify how many incidents the
student was involved in, but cannot identify the behavior that
occurred. Disciplinary reports requested were also not retrieved.
These reports differ from incident reports in that these are
addressed within the building where they occurred and the DPS does
not become involved.

Lastly, the study was limited due to the fact that there was no
comparison group. Only gang-identified cases were examined.
Therefore, the only conclusions that can be made from the research
are that the gang-identified youth do have common characteristics.
But the question arises, do non-gang youth also possess these
characteristics or are they exclusive to youth involved in gang
activity?

The limitations encountered during this research hindered the
wholeness of the study. The effects of these will be discussed
further in Chapter Five under the section entitled Recommendations
for Further Study.

Analysis

The data was analyzed by tabulating basic descriptive
statistics. The choice was made to run descriptive statistics to
demonstrate a summary of all of the demographic and behavioral
data. By manipulating the data in this way, the researcher was able
to draw conclusions that most accurately portray the ideas and
purposes behind the research.

Confidentiality
Individual students’ names were used for the purpose of

collecting the data for all variable sets. After the data had been

27

recorded, the individuals’ names were deleted from all records and
case numbers 1-105 were assigned. The researcher never had
contact with the individuals whose records were being used. The
addresses of the individuals were also deleted when the mapping
procedure had been completed. The map was not included as to not
show where the location of the gang—involved youth.
Summary

This chapter contained an introduction to the collection
methods used as well as the statistics to be used. The research
question was restated so as to connect the purpose with the methods
and the tabulation process. The results of this research are

presented in Chapter IV: Results and Analysis.

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Introduction

Because of the emergence in gang activity within the school
system, this research was designed to begin the process of
identifying students who are gang members or at-risk of gang
involvement or recruitment. The research was undertaken with
three purposes: 1) to compile demographic and behavioral data on
105 students whom the Lansing School District Department of Public
Safety had identified as gang involved; 2) to develop a profile of
common characteristics found in the 105 cases; and 3) to review
available research in an attempt to compare and validate this study’s
findings. The Lansing School District began this study in 1994 in an
effort to begin prevention and intervention education programs.

The questions this research attempts to answer are: 1) Are
there similar characteristics present in the majority of known or
identified gang members in the Lansing School District? 2) Do these
characteristics parallel those characteristics noted in literature
published? 3) If there are similarities, can a profile be developed to
be used as an assessment tool to identify at-risk youth?

The research will be organized by variable in simple tables.

Each variable will be described and the created profile will be shown

28

29

and explained. From this the researcher will examine literature
published on the subject to compare the results of this study to what
has been found on a larger scale.
Variable Tabulations
Variable One- Personal Characteristics

The researcher found that of the 105 students, 89% were male
and 11% were female. Of the 89% males, 15% were Caucasian, 69%
were African-American, 14% were Hispanic/Latino, and 1% were
Asian. Of the females, 92% were African-American and 8% were
Hispanic/Latino. (Table 4.1).

As to ethnicity, 71% (75) were African-American, 13% (14)
were Caucasian, 13% (14) were Hispanic/Latino, and 1% (1) were

Asian, and 1% (1) were other.

Table 4.1 - Gender by Ethnicity

 

Gender
Male Female

Ethnicity

White 15% 0%
Black 69% 91%
Asian 1% 0%
Hispanic/Latino 14% 8%
Other 1% 0%

At the time the study was initiated, the age of each student
was calculated. Table 4.2 illustrates that 23% were 19, 20% were 20,
13% were 18, 15% were 21, 10% were 17, 7% were 16, 6% were 22,
6% were 23, and 1% were 15. Because no records were kept at the
time gang-involvement was recognized, the age of possible initial

involvement cannot be estimated.

30

Table 4.2 - Gang-Affiliated Individuals Projected Ages At
the Beginning of the Study

 

Age Number of Cases
15 1%
l6 7%
17 10%
18 13%
19 23%
2 0 20%
21 15%
2 2 6%
23 6%

Variable Two- Family Background

When tabulating data on familial background, it was found that
of the 105 cases, 66 cases came from a single parent family with 6
cases living with the father and 60 cases living with the mother.
Seven cases lived with a guardian, 17 lived with both parents, and 7
with the mother and a step parent father.

Of the 60 single mothers, 33.3% graduated from high school,
28.3% attended high school but did not graduate, 18.3% attended
college, 11.6% completed middle school, 1.6% completed elementary
school, and 6.66% of the information was unavailable.

Thirty-three percent of the single parent fathers attended
college, 33.3% graduated from high school, and 33.3% attended high
school but did not graduate.

Of the youth who reported living with both parents, the
research found that of the 17 families, 47% of mothers attended high
school, 29% were high school graduates, 12% had attended college, 6%
has completed elementary school, and 6% has post graduate

education. Of the fathers, 41% were high school graduates, 24% had

31
attended high school, 12% had attended college, 12% was unknown,

6% had completed elementary school, and 6% had graduated from
college.

Of the seven cases who lived with the mother and a step parent
father, 57% of the mothers had graduated from high school, 14.3%
had attended college, 14.3% has post graduate education, and 14.28%
were unknown. Of the step parent fathers, 42.9% had graduated
from high school, 42.9% were unknown, and 14.3% had attended high
schooL

Parental occupation was also explored. Of the 60 single parent
mothers, 19 were homemakers, 15 were unemployed, 11 were
nonskilled laborers, 1 was a skilled laborer, and 14 were unknown.
Three single parent fathers were nonskilled laborers, 2 were skilled
laborers, and the occupation of l was not known.

In two-parent families, 53% of the mothers were homemakers,
12% were nonskilled laborers, 6% were unemployed, and there were
29% of the cases where the mother’s occupation was not known. Of
the fathers in two-parent families, 29% were nonskilled laborers,
18% were skilled laborers, 12% were unemployed, and for 41% of the
cases the information on the father’s occupation was not available.

Almost 43% of the single parent mothers living with a step
parent father were homemakers whereas, 29% were nonskilled
laborers, 14% were unemployed, and information was not available
for 14%. Occupations for the step parent father was as follows: 29%
were involved with nonskilled labor, 14.3% were unemployed, and

57.1% of the step parent father’s information was not available.

32
Sibling involvement in gangs was found to be prevalent in 25
of the 105 cases.
School History
At the time the study began, which was 1994, the school status

on the 105 cases was as follows:

Still Enrolled 56 Dropped Out 24
Graduated 20 Transferred 5

Of the 24 students who dropped out, 3 were female and 21 were
male. Of the 56 students who were still enrolled, 11 were involved
in a jail program, 2 attended school through the Camp Highfields
program, and 2 were court—ordered. Sixty-nine of the 105 students
were enrolled in adult education and 12 attended the regular high
school, while the rest were considered dropouts.

Using this data at the beginning of the study, it is projected

that the students would graduate in the following years:

Table 4.3 - Table of Projected Graduation

 

 

Year of Graduation Number of Cases
1990 3
1991 5
1992 13
1993 12
1994 26
1995 17
1996 16
1997 6

1998 7

33

Incident reports that were recorded on computer released the
following results:

Table 4.4 -Incident Reports Per Offense

 

 

OFFENSE NUMBER OF INCIDENTS
Weapon Firearm 5

Trespassing 13 with 1 student having 2 offenses
Simple Assault 12

Insubordination 1

Controlled Substance- Marijuana 3 with 1 student having 2 offenses
Possession of a Pager 3

Suspicious Activity 5

Assault and Battery 10 with 2 students having 2 offenses
Indecent Exposure 2 with 1 student having 2 offenses
Criminal Sexual Conduct 1

Felonious Assault with a Weapon 4

Traffic Accident 1

Fighting 1

Traffic Problems 1

Breaking and Entering- Building 1

Malicious Destruction of PropertyStructures/Equipment 3

Disorderly Conduct 4

Injury to a Student 1

Malicious Destruction of Property-Glass 2 with 1 student with 2 offenses
Weapon PossessionoKm'fe 2

larceny over $100 1

Larceny from an auto 1

Aggravated Assault 2

Abusive Language 1

Weapon Possession-Other 1

Recovery 1

Other 5

Not Available 25

34

Fifty-two of these incidents occurred on the grounds of a high school,
14 occurred on an alternative school ground such as the alternative
education center, the service center, or the vocational building, 21 of
the incidents occurred at a middle school, and 5 incidents occurred at
an elementary school.

Of the incident reports that were collected from the microfiche,
121 incidents occurred in 1989-1990, 80 incidents in 1990-1991, 96
incidents 1991-1992, and 59 incidents in 1992-1993.

With this information, a profile of the most common
characteristics was formulated. To be considered a factor, the
characteristic must appear in more than 75% of the cases within that
category. The following list is the result.

1) Male

2) African-American

3) Living with a Single Parent Mother

4) Has at least 2 school incidents

5) Parent is a High School Graduate or Less

6)Single Parent Mother is a Homemaker

7)Geographic Location is not significant

Comparison to Literature Published
Personal Characteristics
Sex
As with many of the early studies, (Thrasher, 1927; Cohen,
1957) females were excluded from gang research and focus was

placed on the male adolescent groups. Today’s literature provides a

35

much different content and scope as researchers reveal that females
are in fact gang participants.

Klein was one of the first in his period to state that females do
partake in gang activity. He stated that female gangs start off with
members who are sisters or girlfriends of male gang members
(1971). Fagan’s (1990) study revealed that thirty-three percent of
gang membership was female. One year later in 1991, Campbell’s
research also reported that approximately ten percent of gang
members in New York City were female and that female membership
could be as high as thirty-three percent in one gang. The Denver
Youth Study in its fourth year, 1991, claimed female gang population
made up twenty percent of the gang population. The study also
concluded that for the entire four years of the study, female gang
membership constituted between twenty and forty-six percent of
membership. According to the Office of Juvenile Justice Delinquency
Prevention (1994), male gang members outnumbered females by
twenty to one but half or more of these gangs may have female
affiliates.

Female gang affiliation was not a factor in the 105 cases
studied. Only 12 (11%) of the gang-identified youth were female.
The majority, 89%, were male.

Age

James R. Lasley (1992), whose research explored the extent to
which street gangs are the domain of youth or adulthood, stated that
research has been done on the relationship between age and crime
but little has been conducted on the connection between age and

gang membership. The study found the “all things considered, the

36

final conclusion that must be drawn here is that street gangs are still
very much youth gangs.” Data from the Denver Youth Study
acknowledges that youth gang membership does appear to be
connected to age. Results reveal that among the gang members in
year four, 1991, nine percent were twelve years old, thirty-five
percent were fourteen years old, thirty-one percent were sixteen
years old, and twenty-six percent were eighteen years old (Esbensen,
Huizinga, & Weiher, 1993). Klein (1971) found that youth enter
gangs in their post-pubescent stage and withdrawal from gang
activity as they approach the age of eighteen. Miller’s research in
1982 had comparable results stating that gang members ranged from
ages ten to twenty-one but that the peak age was approximately
seventeen.

Age was difficult to access in this study. Age was determined
at the beginning of the study but, due to lack of information on initial
gang involvement or identification, it could not be determined if age
was a relevant factor.

Ethnicity

Gangs appear to be spread across all cultural and ethnic
categories: African-American, Caucasian, Latino/Hispanic, and Asian.
When gangs were changing in the 19708, ethnic composition was
changing as well. It was reported that four-fifths of all gang
members were either African-American or Hispanic, but during this
time, there was a rise in Asian gangs (Miller, 1982). Curry and
Spergel (1992), state that gang involvement and delinquency among
Hispanic adolescents may be associated with intrapersonal factors

such as self-esteem and educational frustration. Whereas, they claim

37

that African-American youth gang involvement is related to social
and interpersonal variables such as exposure to gang members in the
school or at home. Curry and colleagues also revealed, in research
published in 1993, that among twenty-six large city police
jurisdictions, gang membership had the following composition: four
percent were Caucasian, forty-seven percent were African-American,
forty-three percent were Hispanic, and six percent were Asian. Data
also documented a growth of sixty-two percent of Caucasian gang
members between the years of 1990 and 1991.

The literature validates the fact that a variety of ethnic
backgrounds are represented in gang identified youth. African-
American descent had the highest percentage in both males and
females in this study.

Family Background
Parental Status
“Family structure descriptions have generated the largest

amount of research on correlates of delinquency” (Wells & Rankin,

1991). These studies have included variables such as family size,
economic status, and neighborhood. Today, the search for a
correlation continues. “Statistics suggest that in the United States,

boys in families headed by women are at risk for delinquency and
criminal behavior, but far less information is available on girls”
(Steinberg as cited in Earls & Reiss, 1994).

Every year since the second World War, large numbers of
women have joined the work force, which has had important

implication for the organization and management of the family.

38
Bowker & Klein’s 1983 research found, although the

correlations were low, that when compared with nongang members,
gang involved youth came from larger families, lived with a single
parent, and the breadwinner was neither a father nor a step father.
The parents of gang members were also less likely to have completed
a formal education.

Many research efforts have made the connection between gang
membership and parental status. Johnstone (1983) found that in the
cases where the father was present in the youth’s life, there were
significantly more uninvolved youth who were gang members. He
also found that the female-headed households were much more
likely to be targets of gang recruiting activity. Comparable results
from the Denver Youth Study found that 47% of gang members come
from homes headed by single parents (Esbensen, 1993). Burke
(1991) cited a Chicago Tribune article (1990) which stated that
children living in homes headed by single parents or in families
which included one step parent were two to three times more likely
to have behavioral and emotional problems. Alvin Wang’s (1994)
regression analysis showed that the best indicator for gang
membership was the absence of parental or teacher role models. The
Office of Juvenile Justice Delinquency prevention (1994) stated that
family disorganization, including single-parent families or conflict
existing between parents, does not as such predict gang membership.
It is necessary to have a variety of other variables accompanying
weak family structure to impact gang activity within the youth. The
OJJDP further acknowledges that adolescents reared in homes where

conditions are high for social deprivation are drawn to gangs because

39

the gang is seen as an extension of the family. The National Youth
Survey and the National Longitudinal Survey of youth look at Sibling
gang activity and include youth aged 11-17 and 14-21, respectively.
The Arizona Sibling Study’s data looks at pairs of birth-order
adjacent adolescent siblings ages 10 to 16. These studies report an
overall finding suggesting sibling involvement and delinquency to be
correlated (cited in Lauritsen, 1993).

Of the 105 cases studied, 66 cases came from a single parent
family with 60 of those cases living with the mother. Of those single
parent mothers, only 33% had a high school diploma. Sibling gang
involvement was not a relevant factor.

School History

Gangs and school history has not been extensively studied. The
studies which do entertain the notion that gang behavior and school
history is related agree on common premises.

Johnstone (1983) found that gang members exhibit a
considerably lower level of school adjustment than youths not
involved in a gang. This was shown again in Wang’s research in
1994. The research stated that both African-American and White
gang members possessed lower levels of self-esteem when compared
to their classmates. These finding support Kaplan’s (cited in Wang,
1994) theory of self-esteem motivation which states that individuals
with negative self attitudes are prompted to engage in negative or
deviant behavior patterns. Finally, the OJJDP (1994) states that a
gang member is more likely to have done poorly in school and has
little if any identification with school staff. In Klein’s study of gangs

in California, he found that most members were either school

4O

dropouts, had been kicked out, or were truant. On an observational
basis, he found that research differed between Mexican and African-
American gang members in terms of school attendance. Observation
showed that the dropout rate was higher among the Mexican
students (1971). Bowker and Klein, in 1983, found that gang
members were less likely to complete high school or to attend
college.

This study showed, at the time the study began, that a majority
(56) of the gang-identified youth were currently enrolled. Also at
that time, 24 youth had dropped out. School behavior indicated that,
on the average, each student had two incident reports on file.
Violence within the School

With gang members attending school, violence within the
school is an issue that is bound to be apparent. Research conducted
by Phi Delta Kappa (1994) revealed in a Gallup Poll Survey that 18%
of those surveyed considered fighting/violence/gangs to be the
major problem within the schools. This percentage was up five
percent from the previous year, had increased 11% since 1992, and
had increased a full 15% since the survey had been conducted in
1991. Seventy-two percent of those persons surveyed stated that
the cause for the increase in violence was due to growth of gangs
second only to the 78% who responded that the increase in the use of
drugs and alcohol was the main cause of violence among school-age
children. Seventy-two percent also stated that the increase in
violence was due to the availability of weapons. Burke (1991)
revealed that in a Bay area high school near San Francisco, school

officials found 62 guns during a locker search.

41
Contrary to this, the OJJDP (1994) suggests that gang violence

does not occur in schools, although, gangs do recruit and may plan
gang activities which may occur on school property after school is
dismissed. The National Institute of Justice funded a study entitled,
Weapon-Related Victimization in Selected Inner-City High School
Samples. The study reported that “one in five inner-city students
surveyed (1 of 3 males) had been shot at, stabbed, or otherwise
injured with a weapon at or in the transit to or from school.” Within
the school, two-thirds knew of someone who carried a weapon while
in school. Another two-thirds said they knew someone who had
been stabbed, shot at, or assaulted in another manner while in school
(1995). Douglas Clay and Frank Aquila attest that “school
administrators, teachers, parents, and police officers may in fact be
overreacting to the gang problem.” Their nonresearch article
suggests that the gang problem may just be a “1990’s version of the
hula hoop or the pet rock” and that “we should avoid confusing pop
culture with criminal intent (1994).
Geographic Location

John Hagedorn, in his book, People and Folks, (1988) which is
based on his research of Milwaukee gangs, reveals that there is a
relationship between gangs and neighborhood and neighborhoods
and ethnicity. Johnstone (1983) agrees stating that to be recruited
by a street gang, the youth must live in the same locale where the
gang exists. He also states that opportunities for gang membership
are higher in urban communities that are socially as well as

economically depressed. Klein’s 1967 research said the structure of

42

the gang can be traced back to age, residence, patterns, common
school attendance, and proximity to accepted hang-outs.

After mapping each address on a Lansing city map, it was
found that no conclusive results could be drawn regarding
geographic location.

Profile Review

Of the few research articles or handouts that discuss gang
members, few have profiled gang characteristics. Two that do are
compared. The Department of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms attests
that a member will be male, a poor student, in trouble with the
police, from a single parent family, maybe a victim of abuse or
neglect, have negative role models, be street wise, aggressive and
hostile and be interested in power, and not fit into other groups.

In research done in 1975, Friedman and associates found that
the most powerful characteristic was a “high proclivity for violence.”
Other factors included, more arrests, truancy, alcohol abuse, and lack
of connection to their mother.

In comparison, this research found members to: be
predominantly male and of African-American descent, come from
single parent homes reared by mothers with little education, and
have school-related problems.

Conclusion

Upon comparing this study’s results to published literature on
the preceding pages, it was identified that gang characteristics were
similar. Therefore, this study’s findings were validated when
compared on a larger scale. The fact that an adolescent exhibits gang

characteristics does not necessarily signify gang membership or

43

possible recruitment. This profile of characteristics is an attempt to
identify possible risk factors associated with gang membership to aid
school officials in their overall attempt to understand which youth
are most vulnerable to gang membership or recruitment. This
information is helpful in planning educational prevention and

intervention programs for students, staff, and parents.

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY OF RESEARCH

Introduction

As the youth gang population continues to rise, it is imperative
that schools become involved in the prevention and intervention
process. This research was undertaken in conjunction with the
Lansing School District Department of Public Safety. The purpose
behind this study was to develop a profile of characteristics of
known gang members in an attempt to clarify more accurately those
variables common in identified gang members. Questions answered
included: By examining demographic and behavioral data on
identified gang members, could there be common characteristics? Do
gang involved youth come from similar family backgrounds? Do
gang members live in a particular area of the city? Do gang-involved
youth have similar scholastic issues?

After collecting demographic and behavioral data on 105 gang
identified youth, the researcher examined the data for
commonalities. The following characteristics were found to be
common in a majority of the cases. Almost 90% were male, 71% were
of African-American decent, 63% lived with a single parent with 57%

living with a single parent mother.

45

From this profile, the researcher compared professional
literature concerning youth gangs with what the researcher found.
The comparison resulted in a validation of what the researcher found
in this study.

Conclusions

Published research revealed many different perceptions of
youth gangs in terms of definition, concept, and theory. Much
emphasis is placed on gangs as a group with little research
concentrating on gang members as individuals. Historically, gangs
have been studied as a group phenomenon; but the whole is only the
sum of its parts, meaning we need to examine individual gang
members. Therefore, gangs need to be broken down in an attempt to
understand what youth are most susceptible to gang recruitment and
involvement. It was concluded that similarities do exist in identified
gang members.

Recommendations for Further Study
Research of this type, looking at gang members as individuals,

is pertinent to further our understanding of the youth gang

phenomenon. For future studies, it is necessary to e x a min e
demographic and behavioral data more intently. Much of the data
requested for this study was not made available. It would be

beneficial to collect attendance records, grades, as well as delinquent
and criminal records. This information could provide the profile with
more specific behavioral data. This would be beneficial to school
staff when preparing intervention and prevention programs.

It would also be necessary to compare gang-identified youth to

youth not identified as gang involved. This study only looked at 105

46

cases which were previously identified as being gang involved.
There was no group to compare this group to which limited the
study. Therefore, in order to pinpoint characteristics of gang-
involved youth, it would be vital to differentiate between gang and
non-gang youth.

To aid further research within the Lansing School District
concerning gang members, record keeping by the Department of
Public Safety must be systematically kept. Much of the information,
such as strength of gang affiliation and classification, is not recorded.
This severely limits research. If the school district is intent on
making gang prevention and intervention programs a priority,
records must be kept in an organized manner.

Implications for Practice

This research is only the first step in a process to profile gang
involved youth. This profile needs to be used by the school district
as a starting point in developing prevention and intervention
programs as well as developing a system which can identify youth
who may be at-risk. At this time, the profile is vague but provides
the beginning to a long process. A more in-depth examination into
the similarities seen in gang-identified youth would be critical in
order to further this research and give the profile dimension. What
the research currently provides is an answer to the question: Do
gang-involved youth have common characteristics? The answer is,
yes.

Education plays a vital role. School officials must take the
opportunity to reach the youth of today early and educate them on

the many facets involved with gangs. Prevention and intervention

47

programs must reach all students, teachers, and parents in order to
begin combating the gang problem that continues to rise.

“The expansion of gang influence in our schools has reached a
point where it threatens the educational mission. With rival gangs
adopting school property as “turf”, commentators have compared the
territorialization within schools to that which occurs in prison

courtyard” (Janens as cited in Maloney, 1991).

 

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX A

LANSING

S C H 0 0 I.

DISTRICT
Committed to Quality

February 10, 1995

Michelle May

School of Criminal Justice
Baker Hall

Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824

Dear Ms May:

This letter will authorize you to conduct a research project in
conjunctionnwith the Lansing School District's Department of Public
Safety regarding youth gang activity within the Lansing School
District. I understand that this research is a part of your
graduate degree program and will result in a thesis on this topic.
I request that you provide a final copy of your thesis to the

Department of Public Safety.

This letter' will also authorize the release of confidential
information to you in connection with your research project. Any
and all identities of students or their records must be kept as
confidential. In addition, no students may be identified by name

in your final thesis.

Your contact person for this research project will be John Grant,
Public Safety Supervisor. he will assist you in accessing any

records needed for your research.

Good luck with your endeavors.

    

 

Sinc .

 

ee ason
Deputy Superintendent for Support Services

Deputy Superintendent for Support Services
519 West Kalamazoo Street
Lansing, MI 48933

An Equal Opportunity District

48

APPENDIX B

APPENDIX B

SUBJECT PROFILE

 

YEAR PARENT PARENT PARENT

CASE RACE AGE GENDER GRAD STATUS OCCUP EDUCATION

A AA 17 F 98 FATHER N SLABOR AC

B AA 18 M 96 MOM UNEM HS

C AA 17 F 96 BOTH F=N/ A F=HSG M=HS
M=HM

D AA 18 M 94 MOM UNEM HS

E AA 2 l M 92 MOM UNEM HSG

F AA 20 F 92 MOM N/ A AC

G AA 18 M 96 MOM N/ A HSG

H AA 23 M 91 N/ A N/ A N/ A

I AA 19 M 94 BOTH F=NSL F=HSG M=HSG
M=HM

J AA 23 M 90 N / A N/ A N/ A

K AA 21 M 94 STF STFzUME STF=HS
M=NSL M=HSG

L AA 19 M 96 MOM UNEM ELEM

M AA 17 M 96 STF STF=N/ A STF=HSG
M=HM M=PSTG

N C 20 M 93 MOM UNEM AC

0 C 23 M 93 N/ A N/ A N/ A

P C 16 M 97 MOM SL AC

Q L/ H 20 M 94 MOM UNEM HS

R AA 20 M 94 MOM UNEM HSG

S L/ H 20 M 94 FATHER NSL HS

T C 18 M 96 MOM N SL HSG

U AA 20 M 92 MOM N/ A AC

V L/‘H 19 M 94 N/ A N/ A N/ A

W AA 20 M 94 MOM UNEM HS

X AA 21 M 92 MOM UNEM AC

Y AA 18 M 95 MOM HM HSG

Z C 2 l M 92 MOM N/ A AC

A1 AA 16 F 98 MOM N SL HSG

Bl AA 19 M 93 GUARDIAN MS NSL

C 1 AA 19 M 93 MOM N/ A HSG

D1 AA 18 M 96 BOTH F=UNEM F=HS M=HS
M=UNEM

E1 AA 20 M 92 MOM N/ A N/ A

F 1 AA 21 M 93 MOM N SL HSG

G1 AA 16 M 98 MOM UNEM HS

H1 AA 19 M 95 MOM UNEM HS

I 1 AA 22 M 91 BOTH F =SL F=HS M=AC
M=HM

J 1 AA 18 F 95 MOM NSL HS

Kl L/ H 20 M 94 BOTH F=NSL F=HSG M=HS
M:

Ll L/H 16 M 98 BOTH F=NSL F=HSG M=HS
M=HM

Ml L/ H 21 M 94 MOM NSL HS

49

APPENDIX B

 

YEAR PARENT PARENT PARENT

CASE RACE AGE GENDER GRAD STATUS OCCUP EDUCATION

N1 A 20 M 95 BOTH F=N / A F=HS M=HS
M=N/A

01 AA 16 F 97 BOTH F=SL F=HSG M=HS
M=HM

P1 AA 20 M 94 STF STF=NSL STF=HSG
M=HM M=HSG

Q1 AA 21 M 93 MOM N/ A MS

R1 AA 17 M 97 MOM N/A HSG

S 1 AA 19 M 95 MOM HM MS

T1 AA 18 M 95 MOM HM MS

U1 AA 19 M 94 MOM HM HSG

V1 C 21 M 93 MOM UNEM HSG

W1 AA 23 M 90 MOM N/ A N/ A

X1 L/H 19 M 95 GUARDIAN N/A N/A

Y1 C 18 M 96 BOTH F: NSL F=CG M=AC
M=NSL

21 AA 19 M 95 MOM HM HS

A2 AA 17 F 97 MOM HM AC

82 AA 20 M 94 MOM UNEM HS

C2 AA 23 M 92 MOM HM AC

D2 AA 19 M 96 N/ A N/ A N/ A

El C 19 M 96 BOTH F=NSL F=HSG M=HSG
M:

F2 AA 21 M 92 N/ A N/ A N/ A

G2 AA 23 M 90 BOTH N/ A F=HS M=HS

H2 AA 19 M 94 MOM HM HSG

12 C 20 M 93 BOTH F=N/ A F=N / A M=HSG
M=N/A

12 AA 19 M 95 BOTH F=N/A F=AC M=PSTG
M=N/A

K2 AA 21 M 94 MOM HM AC

L2 L/H 20 M 93 MOM HM HS

M2 L/ H 20 M 94 STF STF=N/ A STF=N/ A
M=N/A M=N/A

N2 L/H 19 M 94 BOTH F: NSL F: ELEM
MZI'N M=HBVI

OZ AA 20 M 94 MOM HM MS

P2 AA 15 F 98 GUARDIAN N/ A N/ A

Q2 AA 17 M 97 MOM HM HSG

R2 AA 19 M 94 GUARDIAN SL AC

82 AA 21 M 92 FATHER SL HS

T2 AA 16 F 97 MOM N/ A N/ A

U2 C 18 M 96 BOTH F: UNEM F=HSG M=HSG
M=NSL

V2 AA 19 M 95 BOTH F: N/A F: N/A M=HS
M=HM

W2 AA 22 M 91 N/ A N/ A N / A

X2 C 22 M 92 N/ A N/ A N/‘A

Y2 AA 21 M 91 MOM N/A HS

22 AA 20 M 95 GUARDIAN HM HS

A3 C 18 M 95 FATHER NSL HSG

APPENDIX B

 

YEAR PARENT PARENT PARENT

CASE RACE AGE GENDER GRAD STATUS OCCUP EDUCATION

K3 L/H 22 M 93 MOM UNEM HS

C3 L/H 20 M 94 MOM N SL MS

D3 AA 17 M 96 MOM N SL HSG

F3 C 19 M 95 FATHER SL AC

F3 AA 17 M 96 MOM NSL HSG

G3 AA 18 F 96 MOM UNEM HS

H3 AA 16 F 98 MOM UNEM HS

13 AA 19 M 94 MOM HM AC

J3 AA 2 1 M 93 MOM N/ A HS

IO AA 17 M 96 MOM N/ A N/ A

I3 AA 19 M 95 MOM HM HSG

M3 C 18 M 95 BOTH F: N/ A F=AC M=HSG
MzN/A

N3 AA 22 M 94 MOM N/ A MS

O3 AA 19 M 94 GUARDIAN SL AC

P3 AA 20 M 94 MOM NSL HSG

Q3 AA 19 M 95 STF STF=N / A STF=N/ A
M=HM M=HSG

R3 AA 2 1 M 93 STF STF=NSL STF=HSG
M=NSL M=HSG

S3 L/ H 18 M 96 GUARDIAN SL AC

T3 AA 21 M 91 FATHER N/ A HSG

U3 AA 2 l M 94 MOM HM HS

V3 AA 20 M 92 MOM NSL AC

W3 AA 16 M 98 MOM HM HS

X3 AA 19 M 93 STF STF=N/ A STF: N/ A
M=UNEM M=AC

Y3 L/ H 20 F 95 MOM HM HSG

Z3 AA 19 M 94 MOM HM MS

A3 NA 22 M 92 MOM N SL HS

51

APPENDIX C

APPENDIX C

MICHIGAN STATE

UNIVERSITY

November 15, 1995

 

TO: Michelle May
560 Baker Hall

RE: IRB#: 95-586
TITLE: A DESCRIPTIVE PROFILE OF YOUTH GANG MEMBERS IN
THE LANSING SCHOOL SYSTEM
REVISION REQUESTED: N/A
CATEGORY: Z-H
APPROVAL DATE: 11/15/95

The University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects'(UCRIHS)
review of this project is complete. I am pleased to adVise that the
rights and welfare of the human subjects appear to be adequately
prOteCted and methods to Obtain informed consent are appropriate.
gerefore, the UCRIHS approved this prOJect and any reViSions listed
a ove.

RENEWAL: UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar year, beginning with
the approval date shown above. Investigators planning to
continue a project beyond one year must use the green renewal
form (enclosed with t e original agproval letter or when a
project is renewed) to seek u date certification. There is a
maXimum of four such expedite renewals pOSSible. Investigators
wishing to continue a prOJect beyond that time need to submit it
again or complete reView.

REVISIONS: UCRIHS must review any changes in procedures involving human
subjects, rior to initiation of t e change. If this is done at
the time o renewal, please use the green renewal form. To
revise an approved protocol at any other time during the year,
send your written request to the. CRIHS Chair, requesting revised
approval and referenCing the prOJect's IRB # and title. Include
in our request a description of the change and any revised
ins ruments, consent forms or advertisements that are applicable.

 

PROBLEMS/ . j .
CHANGES: Should either of the following arise during the course of the
meEOF work, investigators must noti y UCRIHS promptly: (1) roblems
RESEARCH (unexpected Side effects, comp aints, etc.) involVing uman
subjects or (2) changes in the research enVironment or new
AND information indicating greater risk to the human subjects than
GRADUATE existed when the protocol was prayiously reViewed and approved.

STUDIES
If we can be of any future help, please do not hesitate to contact us
UniversityCommittoeon at (517)355-2180 or FAX (517M 2-1171.

\SI‘

HumanSubhcu
(UCRIHS)
id E. Wright, Ph.D.
CRIHS Chair

Sincerely,

  
   
   
 

Michigan State University
B2Mmmwwm8mmm
East Lansmg. Michigan
48824-1046

517/355-21 DEW : bed
' ‘ '4 -1171 . .
”XSHIQ cc: Kenneth E. Christian
The Michigan State UniveISIfy

IDEA tS institutional DiverSIly
Excellence m Aaron

M50 is an amrrmhvexflon.
equal-opportunity Institution

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bibliography

Ball, R.A., & Curry, GD. (1995). The logic of definition in criminology:
purposes & methods for defining gangs. Criminology, 33(2), 225-
245.

Bartollas, C. (1993). Juvenile Delinquency (3rd ed.) New York: The
MacMillan Company.

Bastian, L.D., & Taylor, BM. (1991). School crime: a national crime
victimization survey report. (NCJ-l3l645). Washington, DC: US.
Department of Justice.

Bookin-Weiner, H., & Horowitz, R. (1983). The end of the youth gang.
Criminology, 21(4), 585-602.

Bowker, L.H., & Klein, M.W. (1983). The etiology of female juvenile
delinquency and gang membership: a test of psychological and
social structural explanations. Adolescence,18(72), 739-751.

Bryant, D. (1989). Community responses crucial for dealing with
youth gangs. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Burke, J. (1991). Teenagers, clothes, and gang violence. Educational
Leadership, 49, 11-13.

Callahan, P. (1995, March 31). Beliefs on divorce challenged in study:
breakups blamed for kids’ social ills. Chicago Tribune, p.6.

Clay, D., & Aquila F. (1994). Spitting the lit’-fact or fad? gangs and
America’s schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 65-68.

Cloward, R.A., & Ohlin, LE. (1960). Delinquency & Opportunity: A
theory of delinquent gangs. Glencoe: Free Press.

Cohen, A. (1955). The culture of the gang. Glencoe: Free Press.

53

Cromwell, P., Taylor, D., & Palacios, W. (1992). Youth gangs: a 19908
perspective. Juvenile & Family Court Journal, 43(3), 25-31.

Curry, G.D., & Spergel, LA. (1992). Gang involvement & delinquency
among hispanic & African-American adolescent males. Journal of
Research in Crime & Delinquency, 29(3), 273-291.

Curry, G.D., Ball, R.A., & Fox, R.J. (1994). Gang crime and law
enforcement recordkeeping. National Institute of Justice,.
Washington, DC: US. Department of Justice.

Earls & Reiss (1994)

Elam, S.M., Lowell, C.R., & Gallup, A.M. (Eds.). (September, 1994).
Gallup poll of the public's attitudes toward the public schools. Phi
Delta Kappan, 42-56.

Esbensen, F., & Huizinga, D. (1993). Gangs, drugs, and delinquency in
a survey of urban youth. Criminology, 31(4), 565-587.

Esbensen, F., Huizinga, D., & Weiher, A.W. (1993). Gang and non-gang
youth: differences in explanatory factors. Journal of Contemporary
Criminal Justice, 9(2), 94-109.

Fagan, J. (1990). Social processes of delinquency and drug use among
urban gangs. In C. Ronald Huff (ed.), Gangs in America. Newbury
Park, California: Sage.

Fagan, J. (1989). The social organization of drug use & drug dealing
among urban gangs. Criminology, 27 (4), 633-667.

Friedman, C.J., Mann, F., Friedman, AS. (1975). A profile of juvenile
street gang members. Adolescence, 10(40), 561-606.

Gaustad, J. (1990). Gangs. Eric Digest Series, (No. EA 52).)

Goldstein, A.P., & Huff, R. (1993). The gang intervention handbook.
Champaign: Research Press.

Hagedorn, J. (1988). People and Folks: Gangs, crime & the underclass
in a rustbelt city. Chicago: Lakeview Press.

Hardman, D. (1967). Historical perspectives on gang research.
Journal of Reserach in Crime & Delinquency, 4, 5-27.

Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkley: University of
California Press.

Howell, J.C. (1994). Recent gang research: program policy
implications. Crime and Delinquency, 40(4), 495-515.

Howell, J.C. (1994). Gangs. Office of Juvenile Justice Delinquency
Prevention. Fact Sheet #12.

Johnstone, J.W. (1983). Recruitment to a youth gang. Youth and
Society, 14(3), 281-300.

Klein, M.W. (1967). Factors related to juvenile gang membership
patterns. Sociology & Social Research, 51, 49-62.

Klein, M., & Crawford L.Y. (1967). Groups, gangs & cohesivenss.
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 4, 63-75.

Klein, M.W., Maxson, CL, and Cunningham, LC. (1991). “Crack, street
gangs and violence. Criminology, 29(4), 623-649.

Lasley, JR. (1992). Age, social context, and street gang membership:
are “youth” gangs becoming “adult” gangs? Youth & Society, 23(4),
434-451.

Lauritsen, J.L. (1993). Sibling resemblance in juvenile delinquency:
findings from the national youth survey. Criminology, 31(3), 387-
408.

Maloney, J.A. (1991). Constitutional problems surrounding
implementation of “anti-gang” regulations in the public schools.
Marquette Law Review, 75(179), 179-205.

Maxson, C.L., Gordon, M.A., Klein, M.W. (1985). Differences between
gang and nongang homicides. Criminology, 3, 209-222.

McHenry, D., & Jackson, G. (Producers), & Van Peebles, M. (Director).
(1991). New Jack City [Film]. Warner Brothers.

55

Morash, M. (1983). Gangs, groups and delinquency. British Journal of
Criminology, 23(3), 309-335.

National Crime Prevention Council (1993). Building gang prevention
bridges to parents & families, Washington, DC

National School Safety Center News Service (1991). School Safety
Update: Gang membership crosses cultural, geographic bounds, 1-3.

Nicolaides, S. (Producer), & Singleton, J. (Director). (1991). Boyz in
the Hood [Film]. Columbia Tri-Star.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (1994). Gang
suppression & intervention: problem & response research
summary. Washington, DC: US. Department of Justice.

O’Hagan, F.J. (1975). Gang Characteristics: An Empirical Study.
Journal of Child Psychologists and Psychiatrists, 17, 305-314.

Shakur, S. (1993). Monster. New York: The Atlantic Monthly Press.

Shaw C.R., & McKay, H.D. (1942). Juvenile delinquency & urban
areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Short, J. (1968). Gang delinquency & deliquent subcultures. New
York: Harper & Row.

Sibley, 1.8. (1989). Gang violence: response of the criminal justice
system to the growing threat. Criminal Justice Journal, 11, 403-
422.

Stover, D. (1987). Dealing with youth gangs in the schools. The
Education Digest, 30-33.

Taylor, CS. (1990). Dangerous Society. East Lansing, MI: Michigan
State University Press.

Thornberry, T.P., Krohn, M.D., Lizotte, A.J., Chard-Wierschern, D.
(1993). The role of juvenile gangs in facilitating delinquent

behavior. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30(1), 55-
87.

Thrasher, F. (1927). The gang: a study of 1,313 gangs in Chicago.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms
(1992). Gangs, guns, drugs...had enough?. Washington, DC: US.
Government Printing Office.

Wang, A. (1994). Pride & prejudice in high school gang members.
Adolescence, 29(114), 279-291.

Wells, L.E., & Rankin, J.H. (1991). Families & delinquency: a meta-
analysis of the impact of broken homes. Social Problems, 38(1),
71-89.

West Side Story (Producer) & Wise, R., & Robbins, J. (Directors).
(1958.) [Film]. United Artists Corporation. Voyager Company.

Whyte, W.F. (1943). Street Corner Society. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.

Yablonsky, L. (1962). The Violent Gang. New York: The MacMillan
Company.

Yablonsky, L. (1959). The Delinquent Gangs as a Near-Group. Social
Problems, 7, 108-117.

57

 

 

RIES

“11111111111111