Search

Recent reports show that low-income students make up a significant share of those participating in higher education, and their well-being constitutes a key factor that influences their college success. This mixed-methods study examined first-year, low-income students' time use and its relationship to well-being framed by an equity-oriented lens that recognizes the time constraints low-income students navigate. Our mixed methods findings identified the link between time use and well-being and--critically--empirical explanations for these links. First, leveraging a unique experience sampling survey design and multilevel analyses, we found that attending class, studying or doing homework, and working for pay were consistently and adversely related to low-income students' well-being. Low-income students who were also first-generation in college fared worse than continuing-generation students when engaging in these experiences. On the other hand, socializing was positively related to low-income students' well-being. Second, an exploration of longitudinal data from hundreds of student interviews illuminated two primary factors that shaped the relationship between low-income students' time use and well-being: (a) structuring time and developing a routine, and (b) the power of reflection and meaning-making. These findings provide important novel insights about low-income students' college experiences and the relationship between their time use and well-being, and offer crucial guidance for educators on how to support low-income students' well-being as they navigate college.

There is growing awareness that established structures of higher education are often predicated on problematic assumptions about merit, excellence, and rigor. Doctoral qualifying exams, for example, are required to advance to candidacy in many Ph.D. programs despite decades of documented concerns about the implications of standard modes for student equity and well-being. As more Ph.D. programs move to reform these exams and candidacy requirements, it is important to understand how Ph.D. programs, as academic organizations, construct the significance of the qualifying exam. A sociocultural lens suggests qualifying exams and the learning that enables their passage are symbolic rituals that move doctoral students from legitimate peripheral participation toward full membership and belonging in academic communities of practice. We conducted a comparative case study to understand how two Ph.D. programs in the physical sciences that have reformed their candidacy requirements—one elite and one middle ranked but striving for respect—constructed the significance and purpose of their qualifying exam and the broader transition to candidacy. Our inquiry included the contexts and mechanisms that mediated student learning. Through interviews with faculty, staff, and students, we found that the Ph.D. programs’ recognition of their status within their respective disciplines emerged as a crucial component in constructions about the significance of exams and candidacy. The middle-ranked Ph.D. program changed the exam and candidacy structure to reflect legitimate practices in their discipline. The elite Ph.D. program created multiple pathways toward candidacy to mitigate long-standing concerns about gender equity and student well-being. Despite the structural changes, the Ph.D. programs left intact cultural understandings of merit, excellence, and rigor that maintain inequity in doctoral socialization. Our findings suggest that researchers and practitioners should pay more attention to designing and implementing structures that facilitate faculty assessments of doctoral student learning.

The term at-promise gained prominence as a strength-based way to refer to students from minoritized backgrounds that contrasted from deficit-laden terms like "at-risk." In this scholarly paper, we argue that beyond avoiding an obvious deficit categorization, adoption of the term "at-promise" has potential to influence scholarship in higher education research by centering the need for systemic change. Building on prior literature on "at-promise" student terminology and conceptual frameworks of funds of knowledge, community cultural wealth, and validation theory, we suggest that the "at-promise" phrase offers two important contributions to higher education. First, by emphasizing interconnectivity and shared experiences across systems of power, the "at-promise" designation can be used to build coalitions amongst minoritized groups and advocate for broader systemic change. Second, the term promise reflects a societal commitment to improving educational access and retention that is integral to the social contract of higher education as a public good. Thus, use of "at-promise" can center the need for systemic change, but only when done with intentionality to avoid conflation of minoritized groups.

Peer socialization agents (PSAs; e.g., resident assistants, orientation leaders) are trained to facilitate belonging through formal socialization initiatives. We used secondary qualitative data analysis, in combination with a critical constructivist approach, to explore PSAs' sense of belonging and the contexts in which they experience it through ecological systems theory. Findings demonstrated that PSAs rarely experienced a broad sense of belonging, contrary to prevailing wisdom that links involvement and belonging. PSAs are charged with fostering belonging for others while simultaneously navigating systems that undermine their feelings of belonging. Rather than experiencing widespread feelings of belonging, PSAs often experienced it only in specific microsystems that affirmed their identities and experiences, including student groups, organizations, or affinity spaces. Finally, we highlight implications for research and practice.

Objective: Evidence-based consensus in children and adolescents following uncomplicated mTBI indicates acute cognitive symptoms resolve over time with minimal long-term impact. However, traditional paper-and-pencil neuropsychological measures used in many studies have been criticized for lacking sensitivity to subtle changes in attention and executive functions. The National Institutes of Health Toolbox Cognition Battery (NIHTB-CB) is a computerized tool assessing overall cognition, fluid cognition, and crystallized cognition with few studies in pediatric mTBI. The aim of this study is to continue to explore the utility of the NIHTB-CB in adolescents recovering from mTBI compared to orthopedic injuries (OI) and healthy controls (HC). Participants and Methods: The current pilot study utilized a prospective cohort design with longitudinal follow-up in three cohorts of high school student-athletes aged 14-18 (N= 52). Participants with mTBI (n= 17) or OI (n= 15) sustained during sport were recruited within 10 days of injury from a quaternary care setting. An age- and gender-matched cohort of healthy controls (HC) in an active sport season was included for community comparison (n= 20). The NIHTB-CB was administered as part of a neuropsychological screening battery at enrollment and one month after medical clearance (mTBI and OI) or eight weeks after enrollment (HC). Results: Results of a 3(group) x 2(time) ANOVA revealed a main effect of time (p <.001), but not group (p =.06), on the overall Fluid Cognition Composite. The mTBI group showed significantly lower performance on a measure of attention/inhibitory control (Flanker) compared to healthy controls acutely post-injury (p =.04; d = 0.72) and following clinical recovery (p <.01; d = 0.98), with no decline observed in the magnitude of group differences over time. The mTBI and OI groups exhibited deficits in performance on a measure of cognitive flexibility (Dimensional Change Card Sort) compared to the HC group acutely post-injury (both p <.01; d = 1.09-0.93). The magnitude of group differences between the OI and HC groups declined over time (p >.05; d = 0.68), whereas the mTBI group continued to show significantly lower performance following clinical recovery compared to the HC group (p =.02; d = 0.81). The mTBI, OI, and HC groups did not exhibit significant differences in working memory, explicit memory, or processing speed acutely post-injury and following clinical recovery (all p >.05; all d = 0.52 - 0.05). No significant effects of group (p =.16), time (p =.67), or the interaction (p =.45) were found on the Crystalized Cognition Composite. Conclusions: Adolescents with mTBI demonstrated deficits on the NIHTB-CB measures of attention and executive functions acutely post-injury and extending beyond clinical recovery compared with healthy controls in this study. These subtle yet persistent deficits in cognitive performance lend support to the growing body of literature suggesting that alterations in neurotransmission may persist beyond resolution of clinical symptoms of mTBI. Further work is needed in larger samples to better understand trends in cognitive deficits and to identify clinical correlates persisting beyond clinical recovery from mTBI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]