No abstract

Black and Latino students, particularly boys, experience higher rates of school disengagement and dropout than their non-Hispanic White peers (Gregory, Skiba, & Noguera, 2010). Although attention to exclusionary disciplinary practices is necessary to understand their disengagement, a focus on the experiences and perceptions of relationships and on teacher attitudes among boys of color can help to illuminate some of the challenges they experience. Eight focus groups involving 23 middle school-and 99 high school-aged boys of color participating in a community-driven basketball program shared how they experienced their school and their relationships with teachers and peers. Students' age ranged from 12 to 19 years (M ϭ 15.86, SD ϭ 1.71). Constant comparative analysis of focus group interviews yielded the following 5 themes: (a) school climate; (b) respect and disrespect; (c) encounters with discrimination; (d) hopes, wants, needs, and facilitative conditions; and (e) barriers to academic success. These themes illustrate students' perception of relationships, respect, and differential treatment within schools. Although these are barriers to academic success, students were not without hope. Students communicated their hopes and demonstrated an awareness of the importance of healthy relationships with teachers. These themes are discussed within the research on masculinity, discrimination, and school climate. Implications for research and practice are framed within the literature on bias, masculinity, and restorative practices. Public Significance StatementStructural and interpersonal forms of discrimination embedded in schools are reasons for academic disparities (e.g., dropout, suspensions/expulsions) and opportunity gaps (e.g., gifted and talented programs) experienced by boys of color. The findings of this qualitative study shed light on how boys of color experience race-and gender-based structural and interpersonal barriers in academic settings. Boys of color in this study also share their observations of what is needed for change.

Masculinity ideology is argued to be associated with academic outcomes. However, relatively few studies have examined these associations. This study examines the associations between masculinity ideology and academic skepticism, self‐presentation of low achievement, academic engagement, academic initiative, and self‐regulation, above and beyond academic self‐efficacy, among a diverse sample of urban youth. With a sample of 135 eighth‐grade students from a Northeastern middle school, 5 separate multiple hierarchical regression analyses were used to examine whether students’ endorsement of masculinity ideology predicted the criterion variables above and beyond academic self‐efficacy. The sample was comprised of 54 girls and 74 boys ages 12–14 years (M = 13.14; SD = .37). Results showed academic self‐efficacy significantly predicted academic engagement (B = 1.26; β = .53, p < .001; f2 = .39), academic initiative (B = .98; β = .37; p < .001, f2 = .16), and behavioral regulation (B = .61; β = .24; p < .05; f2 = .09) and explained an additional 8 and 10% of the variance in self‐presentation of low achievement (B = .54; β = .33; p = .001; f2 = .14) and academic skepticism (B = .56; β = .35; p < .001; f2 = .15), respectively, over and above academic self‐efficacy. Gender, which was dummy coded and entered as a covariate, only predicted self‐presentation of low achievement. Findings from this study point to the need to foster positive academic outcomes through bolstering academic self‐efficacy and, perhaps more important, addressing masculinity ideology.

Faculty, staff, and students employed by or who serve as representative of universities in the United States are required by the Title IX federal law to report all instances of sexual harassment, discrimination, and sexual assault on college campuses. Despite the well-intended purpose of the Title IX regulations, less is known about campus communities’ experiences and perceptions of this “mandated reporting,” and its influence on disclosure. This exploratory mixed-methods study examines student ( n = 88) and faculty and staff ( n = 77) thoughts, concerns, and experiences regarding this policy at a mid-sized Northeastern University. Participants were recruited utilizing a campus lab system, with supplemental recruitment through student-life offices on campus. Data were collected via an anonymous survey hosted on the Qualtrics platform. Descriptive statistics were conducted for quantitative responses, whereas thematic analysis was utilized to analyze open text responses. Descriptive statistics demonstrate that the majority of participants (students and faculty/staff) were aware of their “mandated reporter” status. Additionally, students and faculty/staff varied regarding their support of the policy and the majority of faculty/staff had not had students disclose sexual violence to them and thus, had not reported any incidences of sexual violence to the university. Results of the thematic analysis further highlight the complexity of students and faculty/staff views’ regarding the “mandated reporter” policy illustrating positive and negative perceived impacts of this policy, as well as several suggestions for improvement. Implications for research and practice are framed within the literature on Title IX, sexual harassment, and violence in the context of universities.

No abstract

No abstract

During the 2016 U.S. presidential election, violence against women was salient in the narratives surrounding both major party candidates: Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. These discussions surrounding violence against women reflect a cultural ideology that excuses and/or supports such violence. This study aimed to understand the function of politics, particularly presidential campaigns, voting behavior, and candidate selection on perceptions of rape culture. Data were collected from two different samples: pre- and postelection from a medium-sized university. Results demonstrated differences between the samples on perceptions of rape culture as well as differences within the postelection sample based on candidate selection.

No abstract