Search results

The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, it proposes a basic organizing framework for when a plaintiff’s race, ethnicity, or sex may impact civil jury awards. The framework takes into account psychological and structural sources of bias and the ways in which they may interact when jurors have more or less discretion. Second, the paper employs a methodological innovation to overcome one of the primary barriers to empirical field research on bias in civil legal decisions: the absence of plaintiff demographic information.

The data set is comprised of jury verdicts in tort cases combined with information from the US Census Bureau regarding race and ethnicity. Statistical tests measure the relationships between race, ethnicity, sex, and awards for economic damages and pain and suffering.

Overall, the results were consistent with the psycho-structural framework. Where jurors had discretion (i.e. pain and suffering damages), they awarded less to black plaintiffs than to white plaintiffs, indicating potential psychological bias. Where jurors had little discretion (i.e. lost income) they awarded less to female plaintiffs and more to Asian plaintiffs than to male and white plaintiffs, respectively, a potential reflection of structural income disparities. Thus, the framework and method have promise for exploring relationships between structural and psychological bias and differential civil jury awards.

Because demographic information is not easily available, there is very little research on race and gender bias in civil cases. This study introduces and provides a conceptual test of a novel framework for when bias is most likely to impact damage awards in these cases and tests it using advances in social demography that can help researchers overcome this barrier.

This study focused on identifying measurable constructs of a restorative classroom and appropriate metrics to measure those constructs through content validity analysis of a direct observation tool. The tool was designed to assess restorative practices implementation in the classroom in the context of professional development supporting teachers in a fundamental reorientation towards non-punitive discipline.

The authors administered a 30-item survey to a panel of 14 experts in restorative practices implementation in schools asking them to provide quantitative and qualitative feedback on the tool's content, metrics, and utility for building teachers' skill and confidence in promoting a restorative classroom. The authors calculated item-level content validity indices and scale-level content validity indices. To interpret findings, the authors applied acceptability criteria recommended in the literature. The authors used qualitative coding to analyze qualitative responses and contextualize quantitative findings.

Quantitative results indicated that the tool's structure and measures of teacher behavior were acceptable. The student behavior scale did not meet the acceptability criterion. Qualitative feedback indicated that observation and later co-reflection on teachers' use of specific restorative skills was deemed helpful to teacher implementation of restorative practices. Observations of student behaviors, however, needed to be broadened to emphasize student voice and agency and the quality of student interactions.

Novel approaches to measurement are needed to facilitate teacher implementation of restorative practices as schools adopt those practices to promote equitable student agency, engagement and belonging in a pivotal shift from existing punitive discipline systems.

While the literature on twice exceptionality is growing, it often focuses on twice exceptionality generally, overlooking within group differences that may create unique experiences for students. As such, there is a need to explicitly detail these differences to push the knowledge base forward. This chapter focuses on the unique needs and experiences of twice exceptional (2E) Black boys as they navigate K-12 schools. Further, this chapter details the ways in which school counselors may respond to their needs through comprehensive, antiracist school counseling practices. Finally, implications for policy and research are discussed.