Bullying and school crime are important social problems that are receiving increased attention by scholars and policy makers. However, several critical questions remain unaddressed. First, does the public perceive bullying as a serious problem and judge schools-primary, secondary, and postsecondary-as safe or unsafe? Second, does the public use a "bullying lens" to judge school safety-that is, do citizens understand bullying as a serious threat to students' well-being? Third, are there racial differences in these perceptions? Prior research identifies racial differences in the prevalence of bullying, as well as in students' views of school safety and citizens' fear of crime. Similar racial gaps may characterize public perceptions of bullying and school safety. This study begins to illuminate answers to these questions by analyzing data from a representative sample of Virginians. Multivariate regression analyses produce several notable findings. First, we find that members of the public believe bullying in schools is an increasingly serious problem, and their perceptions of bullying influence their judgments of whether schools and colleges/universities are safe. Second, Black members of the public are more likely than persons from other racial and ethnic backgrounds to perceive that bullying is increasing and is a serious problem in schools, and, in turn, to judge that schools and universities are less safe. Our results indicate that members of the public see bullying as a principal threat to student safety. They suggest there is a strong reservoir of public support for antibullying initiatives and, more broadly, efforts to increase student safety.
The unprecedented double blow of the COVID-19 pandemic and ensuing steep recession challenges local governments in profound ways, from managing public health responses, ensuring the safety of workers, and balancing budgets in the midst of extreme uncertainty. How are local governments in the U.S. navigating these turbulent times? What impacts on revenues and services are they seeing? How does all of this impact their relationships with federal and state levels of government? Through in-depth interviews with thirty top local leaders (mayors or city/county managers), this article provides an insightful snapshot that begins to answer these questions.
Public administrators at all levels are discussing implications of President Trump’s proposed budget. While eventual outcomes remain uncertain, a recent interview of a panel of local government practitioners highlighted that when such reductions occur, local governments often operate as “first responders” in serving the most vulnerable residents within their respective communities. They run toward the potential equity crisis rather than away, in part because they see those affected as neighbors. In essence, their focus on social equity includes an emphasis on direct services as well as trust building. The panel also highlighted the importance of trust building and leadership for sustainability of social equity work and noted assessment and performance improvement as a key opportunity for academic/practitioner collaboration.
While not yet certain, Trump administration proposals to cut federal programs, including support for low-income housing, economic development in distressed rural communities, and workforce training programs, significantly threatens resources that local administrators have depended on to pursue greater social equity. As with the “new normal” following the Great Recession, administrators will be asked to innovate complex structural changes, including searching for new ways to generate needed revenues. These areas have both profound social equity implications and yet have received less attention from public administration researchers concerned with social equity. By necessity, if not by choice, local public administrators will be at the leading edge of innovation in these areas. By sharing ideas and innovations, administrators can support each other and advance our collective understanding of best practices in guiding structural change and financial equity administration. Most importantly, administrators can partner with their communities to defend, maintain, and expand social equity and social justice gains.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.