No description available.

No description available.

[pt] Este trabalho investiga, sob a perspectiva do encontro de serviço, como os alunos de baixa renda - bolsistas - lidam com as diferenças e os preconceitos vividos em um ambiente acadêmico de elite. Encontro de serviço é um conceito que tem origem e importância no marketing de serviços e que trás para este trabalho o papel dos alunos como consumidores de um serviço. O trabalho, de cunho prático, introduz no encontro de serviços o que alguns autores, particularmente Sue et al. (2010), chamam de microagressões. Estuda as estratégias de enfrentamento diante das diferenças socioeconômicas e culturais e o modo como lidam com o preconceito. Foram realizadas várias entrevistas com alunos de último período de graduação de universidade privada para identificar os principais temas ligados às dificuldades de integração e de adaptação. Os resultados indicam que a agressão ocorre de forma sutil, velada e indireta e, em muitos casos, o autor sequer tem a consciência de que comete uma ação de discriminação. Após essa etapa, as principais questões foram levantadas e classificadas segundo o tipo de microagressão, seguindo o modelo de análise de Sue et al. (2010), com o objetivo de compreender o nível de consciência de quem pratica a ação, seja ele professor, aluno ou funcionário e o grau de prejuízo causado a esse grupo de consumidores. As principais questões encontradas, como exclusão e isolamento mostram a necessidade de pensar medidas gerenciais que busquem atender as necessidades deste grupo de consumidores em desvantagem, em relação aos demais. Neste sentido, este trabalho pode auxiliar as universidades e seus gestores no entendimento dos preconceitos vividos por esses consumidores e nas possibilidades de solução. / [en] This work investigates how low-income students handle prejudices in a university elite environment. To that end, it adopts two standpoints. First, it supports the perspective of the service encounter as an underlying concept for the role of students as consumers. Second, it introduces the concept of microaggressions (SUE et al, 2010) to the academic scene of service s marketing. This study also acknowledges the socioeconomic and cultural differences of students as the primary cause of the aggressions. Because of this, the study has a particular concern with how students deal with prejudice. Accordingly, it focuses on the coping strategies students adopt in the face of discrimination. This study results from several interviews with undergraduate students to identify the difficulties of integration and adaptation. The findings indicate that aggressions occur in a subtle, veiled and indirect way. In many cases, even the perpetrator is unaware of the discrimination action. Finally, the work presents a classification of microaggressions following the model of Sue et al. (2010). This model addresses two central issues. The first is the level of awareness of who does the action, be it teacher, student or employee. The other is the degree of damage caused to the consumers. Equally important is to add here the concerns with isolation and exclusion. All these questions require proper managerial attention.

This thesis will use data derived from in-depth interviews, historical research, and environmental justice literature to examine the academic achievement of students living in the Community of Lennox. Specifically, this thesis will explore the intersectionality between social environments and academic resources to analyze how it supports or deters students from obtaining a higher degree education.

This study analyzes how a group of six high school freshmen responded to engaging in Teaching and Learning Mathematics for Social Justice (TLMSJ), which is one possible articulation of criticalmathematics. Commonalities among this diverse group of students were that they were all students of Color from low socioeconomic status, enrolled in Algebra 1, attending the same Title I public high school. These students participated in an eight-week-long after-school program named “Socially Aware Algebra Students” (SAAS), where they investigated a variety of social injustices through doing Algebra 1 mathematics. This program was designed and facilitated by this study’s author, whose role would be considered practitioner–researcher. The purpose of this dissertation is to address the need for feedback on TLMSJ from a diverse group of students of Color. Specifically, this study sought to determine the participants’ perceptions both of engaging in TLMSJ and of the social justice topics that were investigated as well as the participants’ mathematical learnings that occurred during the SAAS program. This qualitative ethnographic case study relied on the following data sources: interviews, questionnaires, observations, journal entries, student work products, and pre- and posttests. Findings suggest that students’ reactions to this particular version of learning mathematics through social justice are as varied as the students themselves. While all participants reported increased mathematical skill and confidence due to their participation in SAAS and all enjoyed learning mathematics that was related to real-life topics, not every participant was interested in learning about social injustices. Secondly, the post-assessment data did not display measurable growth, despite the participants’ perceptions of their mathematical improvement. These findings suggest that TLMSJ, despite being the most common articulation of criticalmathematics, may not be the most effective means by which mathematics teachers can render their teaching socially just. The study concludes with various recommendations for mathematics teachers interested either in teaching mathematics through social justice topics, or in teaching mathematics in ways that are aligned with the spirit of social justice.

<p>Socioeconomic inequality unduly impacts the pathways of socioeconomically disadvantaged students (SDS) in engineering. Past and present scholarship suggests that inequitable access to physical and interpersonal resources inhibits K-16+ students' ability to engage in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) meaningfully. This lack of access negatively impacts SDS' pursuit of, and success in, engineering. Thus far, quantitative studies seeking to understand SDS' trajectories to and through engineering have used income as a proxy for socioeconomic disadvantage. However, such measures are not theoretically positioned to accurately depict or account for the complex sociological processes that lead to, or result from, socioeconomic inequality. Furthermore, such measures do not account for parallel inequalities such as racism, sexism, and classism that exist, influence, and are influenced by it. Therefore, the purpose of this work was to 1) develop a more sociologically accurate measure of socioeconomic inequality, 2) to use that measure to identify the impacts of such inequality on SDS' pathways to and through engineering, and finally, 3) to explore the narrative experiences of SDS when accounting for a more accurate depiction. Using a Critical Realist Feminist approach to structural equation modeling, restricted data from the National Center for Education Statistics’ Educational Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002) as well as other supplemental data were used to construct and test a more complex and representative measure of socioeconomic disadvantage, the Model of Socioeconomic Inequality (Study 1). Study 2 used this model to examine how aspects predicting important engineering student outcomes. Neighborhood location and conditions, level of Parent Educational Involvement, and availability of Household Educational Resources negatively impact SDS' opportunities to engage and succeed in engineering and college more broadly. Furthermore, the model suggested that such interactions are uniquely mediated by the intersectional inequalities experienced by SDS and their families. Finally, a rich narrative of one student, Samantha, is included to better understand the lived experiences of SDS amongst their pathways to and through engineering. Samantha was a Queer Asian American female SDS graduating from Computer Science Engineering who has low scores on Parent Educational Involvement and Household Educational Resources. Samantha's narrative shows the important role that the factors identified in the Model of Socioeconomic Inequality had in her experiences. Specifically, Samantha had little access to Parent Educational Involvement and Household Educational Resources from her parents. Rather, these forms of support came from what she referred to as her ``chosen family,'' a group of professors, co-workers, friends, and others who viewed and supported her identity authentically and provided her physical resources when she needed them. Access to this group and the resources they provided supported Samantha's belonging and her ability to succeed in engineering. However, Samantha's narrative also uncovered findings not included in the Model of Socioeconomic Inequality. Specifically, Samantha's narrative suggested she had experienced significant, long-term traumas that were both related and unrelated to her socioeconomic experiences. These traumas negatively impacted Samantha's feelings of belonging and caused her to question her place in engineering, but they were partially mitigated by the support of her chosen family. This three-study dissertation challenges current engineering education thinking regarding the knowledge and study of socioeconomics, trauma, and Intersectionality more broadly. It also challenges engineering education researchers and practitioners to question the current methods of how they support SDS in a multitude of spaces.</p>

Compared to their peers, low-income students are 90% less likely to graduate within 6 years and are more likely to drop out. At the local site, this problem is also evident in that the retention rate for the Fall 2014-15 cohort was 78.3%, but just 60.2% for those defined as low-income students. The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of low-income 1st year college students' perceived confidence in their use of technology and how it influenced their decision to stay in college. Understanding the role technology plays in the decision to stay in college will shed light on ways to offer support to increase retention of these students. The conceptual framework that guided the study was Bruno's confidence based learning methodology. This framework suggests there is a connection between knowledge and confidence. A qualitative descriptive design was used collecting data through a series of 10 open-ended interviews with low-income 1st year college students. The central research question explored how low-income 1st year college students describe their confidence in the use of technology as a factor in their retention. Data analysis consisted of manual coding to identify themes from the interview data. The findings suggested low-income 1st year students do not have confidence in their ability to use technology and remain in college. A policy recommendation to reinstate the information literacy policy for low-income 1st year students could affect social change as additional resources help to raise low-income 1st year college students' confidence using technology and supports them to persist in college.

This dissertation is composed of three chapters, each applying different quantitative methods to study a specific early childhood education policy or program. Chapter One explores whether expanding preschool education in low- and middle-income countries with public resources would be a viable policy option, using a benefit-cost analysis. Chapter Two examines economic costs of an emergent literacy program that places paid community tutors into pre-K classrooms in Minnesota using the ingredients method of cost analysis. Chapter Three investigates the effectiveness of a school-based attendance intervention at public preschools in high poverty communities of Chile by using student level observational data. The three chapters each highlight different policy problems: global inequalities on access to preschool education, reading gaps among American PK-12 students, and high student absenteeism at publicly funded preschool programs. Together, these studies advance our knowledge about ways to address existing early childhood education policy problems. These studies also help shed light on gaps in our current knowledge and lay out future research agenda.

Despite decades of research and billions of dollars spent per annum to promote at-promise student—that is, low-income, first-generation, and/or racially/ethnically minoritized students—college success, at-promise students continue to be retained and graduate at lower rates than their traditionally college-going peers. The purpose of this study is to investigate how faculty coordinators in the Thompson Scholars Learning Community (TSLC) facilitate and integrate instructors into the program’s ecological validation which has been found to promote at-promise student success. This study is framed by the ecological validation model of student success in conjunction with a systems theory perspective of faculty roles to investigate how TSLC’s faculty coordinators support instructors to engage in high-quality interactions with at-promise students. This qualitative multiple-case study utilizes 56 semi-structured interviews with faculty coordinators, TSLC program directors, and TSLC instructors, as well as observations and documents, from three University of Nebraska campuses to triangulate its findings. Results indicate the importance of the mesolevel role faculty coordinators play in both students and instructors’ ecologies. Three primary ideas emerged. First, faculty coordinators helped bridge instructors to campus and program resources which promoted attentiveness to student needs, the adoption of validating teaching practices, and grew instructor affinity with the program. Moreover, faculty coordinators helped departments understand the program and its students which empowered them to assign good instructors. Second, faculty coordinators helped align instructors’ personal, practitioner, and professional goals with their teaching in the program by working with instructors and departmental leadership to contextualize instructors’ work within TSLC as promoting student success, professionally developing, and beneficially for the department. Third, faculty coordinators influenced instructor pedagogy by encouraging validating teaching practices, demonstrating validating approaches, and serving as single points of contact for instructors. As single points of contacts for instructors, faculty coordinators were able to promote attentiveness to student issues by distributing the responsibility for supporting students across the students’ mesolevel—that is, throughout the program, their other instructors, and campus resources. Results also indicate potential avenues for how institutions can structure supports for instructors to scale TSLC’s ecological validation, including the creation of single points of contacts for instructors, the creation of validating incubators, and the importance of linking trainings with mesolevel supports.

No description available.