Robert W S Coulter1, Taylor Paglisotti2, Gerald Montano3, Kaitlin Bodnar4, Melina Bersamin5, Stephen T Russell6, Ashley V Hill7, Christina Mair8, Elizabeth Miller9. 1. Assistant Professor, (robert.ws.coulter@pitt.edu), Department of Behavioral and Community Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, 6129 Public Health Building, 130 De Soto Street, Pittsburgh, PA, 15261., USA. 2. Data Analyst Coordinator, (taylor.paglisotti@chp.edu), Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, 120 Lytton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213-1444., USA. 3. Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, (gerald.montano@chp.edu), Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, University Center, Suite 225, 120 Lytton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213-1481., USA. 4. Research Assistant, (kab307@pitt.edu), University of Pittsburgh, Graduate School of Public Health, P.O. Box 7319, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213., USA. 5. Senior Research Scientist, (mbersamin@peralta.edu), Prevention Research Center, 1516 East Franklin Street, Chapel Hill, NC, 27514., USA. 6. Professor, (stephen.russell@utexas.edu), Department of Human Development and Family Sciences, Population Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, 108 E Dean Keeton Street, Austin, TX, 78712., USA. 7. Postdoctoral Researcher, (ashley.hill@chp.edu), Division of Adolescent and Young Adult Medicine, UPMC Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, University Center, Suite 302.4, 120 Lytton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213-1481., USA. 8. Associate Professor, (cmair@pitt.edu), Department of Behavioral and Community Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, 6136 Public Health Building, 130 De Soto Street, Pittsburgh, PA, 15261., USA. 9. Professor, (elizabeth.miller@chp.edu), Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, University Center, Suite 302.2, 120 Lytton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213-1481., USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: School assets-such as connectedness, caring relationships with adults, high behavioral expectations from adults, and meaningful participation-are associated with positive outcomes for adolescents. However, little is known about how school assets differ among adolescents with intersecting marginalized identities. METHODS: We used the 2013-2014 California Healthy Kids Survey (N = 320,462 students) to examine differences in school assets with respect to sexuality, gender, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status using adjusted multilevel linear regression models. RESULTS: Sexual minority, gender minority, racial/ethnic minority, and low socioeconomic status adolescents had significantly lower protective school assets. For all outcomes, the differences between sexual minority and heterosexual adolescents were more pronounced among nontransgender girls than nontransgender boys; however, these differences were not consistently present among racial/ethnic minority students. For school connectedness and meaningful participation, differences for racial/ethnic minorities versus white adolescents were more pronounced among nontransgender girls than nontransgender boys. Differences between transgender adolescents and nontransgender boys were more pronounced for white adolescents compared to some other racial/ethnic minority students. Overall, adolescents with certain multiple marginalized identities had lower school assets. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions are needed to strengthen school assets among marginalized students, thereby helping mitigate health and education inequities.
BACKGROUND: School assets-such as connectedness, caring relationships with adults, high behavioral expectations from adults, and meaningful participation-are associated with positive outcomes for adolescents. However, little is known about how school assets differ among adolescents with intersecting marginalized identities. METHODS: We used the 2013-2014 California Healthy Kids Survey (N = 320,462 students) to examine differences in school assets with respect to sexuality, gender, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status using adjusted multilevel linear regression models. RESULTS: Sexual minority, gender minority, racial/ethnic minority, and low socioeconomic status adolescents had significantly lower protective school assets. For all outcomes, the differences between sexual minority and heterosexual adolescents were more pronounced among nontransgender girls than nontransgender boys; however, these differences were not consistently present among racial/ethnic minority students. For school connectedness and meaningful participation, differences for racial/ethnic minorities versus white adolescents were more pronounced among nontransgender girls than nontransgender boys. Differences between transgender adolescents and nontransgender boys were more pronounced for white adolescents compared to some other racial/ethnic minority students. Overall, adolescents with certain multiple marginalized identities had lower school assets. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions are needed to strengthen school assets among marginalized students, thereby helping mitigate health and education inequities.
Authors: Melina Bersamin; Robert W S Coulter; Jenna Gaarde; Samantha Garbers; Christina Mair; John Santelli Journal: J Sch Health Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 2.118
Authors: M D Resnick; P S Bearman; R W Blum; K E Bauman; K M Harris; J Jones; J Tabor; T Beuhring; R E Sieving; M Shew; M Ireland; L H Bearinger; J R Udry Journal: JAMA Date: 1997-09-10 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Chelsea N Proulx; Robert W S Coulter; James E Egan; Derrick D Matthews; Christina Mair Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2019-01-26 Impact factor: 5.012