Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Beyond the field: New research highlights how NIL is reshaping college athlete identity
In an era of name, image and likeness, or NIL, many college athletes are thinking differently about who they are — seeing themselves not just as competitors or students, but also as influencers with distinct voices and causes, according to a new study from the University of Florida. Molly Harry, Ph.D., an assistant professor in the Department of Sport Management at the UF College of Health and Human Performance, surveyed 200 athletes from 21 Power Four universities to better understand how NIL, which refers to the rights of college athletes to earn money through endorsements, sponsorships, social media promotions and other commercial opportunities, has impacted the way athletes perceive their roles and identities. “Historically, we’ve viewed them (college athletes) through the lens of athletics or academics, but they’re daughters, brothers, role models, and increasingly, they’re now cultivating public personas and marketing skills.” —Molly Harry, Ph.D., an assistant professor in the Department of Sport Management The findings, published Friday in the Sociology of Sport Journal, reveal a growing recognition among athletes that they are more than the two-dimensional “student-athlete” model that is traditionally used in research and policy. “With the shift in NIL policies, athletes are starting to develop roles and identities related to that of the influencer,” Harry said. “Historically, we’ve viewed them through the lens of athletics or academics, but they’re daughters, brothers, role models, and increasingly, they’re now cultivating public personas and marketing skills.” Through survey responses across seven major sports — football, baseball, men’s and women’s basketball, gymnastics, volleyball and softball — Harry and UF doctoral student Hannah Kloetzer examined athletes' engagement with NIL opportunities, as well as the personal sacrifices they made to pursue them. They found that many athletes now view NIL as a platform to promote causes they care about, build connections with their communities and explore career pathways after college. One softball player described the value of NIL in a way that highlights the broader impact: “It’s been great to feel seen and have your hard work in a sport help in other parts of life. It’s really nice to use NIL on a resume as marketing experience.” Athletes surveyed said they found deals not just with big-name brands, but more often with local businesses like restaurants, boutiques and community partners. This entrepreneurial approach often required initiative and personal outreach, something many athletes had to learn on their own. “Some athletes told us they felt lost when trying to navigate NIL,” Harry said. “Others shared how they reached out to local businesses or organized their own camps.” One particularly striking finding, Harry said, was that some athletes were making athletic sacrifices — like spending less time training — to pursue NIL work, a shift that underscores the importance of these opportunities. Harry stressed that while no one reported skipping practices, athletes did acknowledge shifting their priorities to make room for NIL-related endeavors. “If you’re willing to give up something in your athletic routine, that speaks volumes about how central NIL — and influencer identities — could become for some athletes,” she said. Another key insight: football players of color from low socioeconomic backgrounds were most likely to self-identify as influencers. This emerging pattern stands in contrast to perceived broader trends in the social media world. “That was one of the most fascinating takeaways,” Harry said. “We have this unique subset of influencers — college football athletes — that are starting to enter this space.” Harry’s research builds on a growing conversation in the academic community about the evolving identity of college athletes. A few conceptual pieces have previously proposed the idea of a “student-athlete-influencer,” but Harry’s team is one of the first to gather empirical data to back it up. This new perspective has broad implications for how universities and organizations like the NCAA support college athletes, both during their playing years and as they prepare for life after sport. “As fans, we often see athletes as commodities on the field,” Harry said. “But they’re humans first, and they’re starting to recognize their own value and tap into their potential beyond the playing field.” In addition to academic and athletic support, Harry believes universities should invest in more targeted resources tailored to influencer pressures, like mentorship opportunities and training that goes beyond basic social media etiquette. “Athletes who take on influencer roles may deal with unique stressors, whether it’s comparing engagement numbers or coping with public scrutiny,” she said. “It would be valuable to provide opportunities where athlete-influencers can support each other, share strategies and protect their mental health.” A football player who participated in the study summed up the broader potential of NIL: “I’m very appreciative of NIL opportunities and the ability to continue to grow my camp and greater brand outside of my football program.” Looking ahead, Harry plans to explore this evolving identity through more qualitative research, with a focus on what it truly means to be an “influencer” in the context of college athletics. “Athletes are more than football players. They are more than swimmers,” she said. “They are people who we walk with on our college campuses, and they are people who bring value to our society in a host of ways.”
New book from Aston University academic shows that Christmas tasks mostly fall on women
New book by Dr Emily Christopher shows differences in how household tasks are divided by men and women Book highlights that women tend to buy the Christmas presents and send cards Men often see women as being more thoughtful or having better knowledge of what people would like. A new book from Aston University’s Dr Emily Christopher reveals that when it comes to sending Christmas cards and buying Christmas presents, women are still mostly doing the work as they are perceived to have better knowledge of what people would like. Dr Emily Christopher, a lecturer in sociology and policy at Aston School of Law and Social Sciences, has recently published her book Couples at Work: Negotiating Paid Employment, Housework and Childcare, which look at how household tasks are divided by men and women and the reasons behind these divisions. The data for the book has been collated over an eight-year period with couples being interviewed twice to provide a robust set of results. It looks at how different sex parent couples combined paid work, housework and childcare. The research revealed how gender norms continue to shape how certain daily household jobs are divided. Women were more likely than men to clean the house, especially bathrooms, wash clothes and put clothes away. Men still tend to do tasks like mowing the lawn and DIY but now are also more likely to do the cooking and the grocery shopping. The research shows that the key to understanding how household tasks are divided lies in the meaning they hold for partners. With the festive season upon us, the book reveals that woman are largely responsible for the Christmas present buying and sending cards with 100% of those taking part in the research saying that women mostly carried out these tasks. This also included buying for the male partner's relatives. In instances where men had a 'helping' role in these tasks, this included being involved in the discussion or consulting on choice of presents, especially for children, with only a small minority buying presents for their own family. The data revealed that where women didn't choose and buy presents for their partners family, they were still involved in reminding their partners that this needed to be done or advising on choice of gifts, showing that women were still taking on the mental load of planning for the festive season. The book reveals that when men were questioned about why they didn't get involved in present buying, they drew on gender norms. Women were often described, by the men, as being more thoughtful or having better knowledge of what people would like. Men often described how family members wouldn’t receive presents at all if it relied on them. Although much of the gift giving and organising represented love and affection for the women, which many found enjoyable, many still saw it as work and expressed that they would like their partners' to be more involved. Dr Christopher said: “This book takes an in-depth look at the way in which everyday roles around the household are divided between men and women. “The research shows that over a period of eight years fathers increased their role in childcare tasks but this did not always extend to housework. “The pandemic was an opportunity to change how couples share housework but women were still more likely to carry out tasks like cleaning, washing clothes and putting clothes away and overwhelmingly remained responsible for the mental orchestration of family work.”
From classrooms to communities: Rethinking civic engagement in K–12 education
When national headlines focus on school board battles and political polarization, James Bridgeforth, assistant professor of educational leadership at the University of Delaware, is focused on what’s possible instead: building a more inclusive, participatory model of democracy through public education. His research in UD's College of Education and Human Development explores how community voice, equity and local leadership intersect to shape education policy – and how school boards can serve as vital engines for rebuilding public trust in government. "Despite the often sensationalized stories of chaotic school board meetings and the influence of more national "culture war" issues, I still believe that it's possible for people from different backgrounds, experiences, and points of view to come together to figure out how to best serve the needs of all of our children." – Bridgeforth Bridgeforth’s work centers on education governance, policy and leadership, with particular attention to how racism and anti-Blackness manifest in schools and policymaking spaces. His scholarship highlights the importance of inclusive decision-making, arguing that effective education policy must be representative of the diverse communities it serves. He recently published the report "Navigating Democracy in Divided Times" with co-authors on this topic. As part of his work with the Getting Down to Facts III project at Stanford University, Bridgeforth collaborates with researchers studying how to improve California’s TK–12 system and inform the next governor’s education policy agenda. His work documents the complex realities faced by local school board members – often minimally paid community leaders navigating contentious public discourse, social media pressure and limited resources. He notes that this research can be applied to school boards around the country. The next frontier: Youth civic engagement Over the next several years, Bridgeforth aims to deepen understanding of how schools can nurture young people’s civic skills and leadership capacity through participation in governance. One proposed project – "Strengthening Opportunities for Youth Civic Engagement and Student Voice in Educational Governance" – uses participatory action research to explore how student board member policies and engagement practices foster civic agency and democratic mindsets. This collaborative work brings together youth-led community organizations and education researchers to study how these experiences shape long-term civic behavior – from voting to public service. Why it matters Bridgeforth’s research arrives at a pivotal time for American democracy. As trust in public institutions erodes, local school boards remain one of the spaces where citizens can directly shape policy. His work points to a hopeful truth: democracy’s renewal may begin in classrooms, communities and the local school board meetings shaping them. For journalists covering education, race or civic engagement, Bridgeforth offers data-driven insight, lived experience and policy expertise – helping make sense of one of the most pressing questions of our time: How can we build systems that truly serve all students and communities? This work collectively demonstrates a number of promising opportunities to foster more inclusive, community-connected forms of governance, particularly in a time of eroding trust in government institutions." – Bridgeforth ABOUT JAMES BRIDGEFORTH Assistant Professor, College of Education and Human Development James Bridgeforth is an educator, researcher and policy advocate whose work focuses on community voice in education policy and the politics of educational leadership. His scholarship has appeared in top journals including Journal of School Leadership, Education Policy Analysis Archives, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis and Educational Administration Quarterly, and he has contributed to Education Week and The Washington Post. A recipient of the National Academy of Education/Spencer Foundation Dissertation Fellowship, Bridgeforth holds a Ph.D. in Urban Education Policy from the University of Southern California, an M.Ed. in Educational Administration and Policy from the University of Georgia, and a B.A. in Political Science and Sociology from Georgia College & State University. Expert available for: Interviews on K–12 school governance, education policy and democracy Commentary on community voice and equity in education decision-making Analysis of youth civic engagement and participatory leadership To contact Bridgeforth, email mediarelations@udel.edu.
Expert Research: The Fourth Industrial Revolution, Artificial Intelligence and Domestic Conflict
Artificial Intelligence is often framed as a driver of innovation. But it also has the power to disrupt the very foundations of our societies. In a recent study, experts Craig Albert, PhD, and Lance Hunter, PhD, from Augusta University explored how AI, as part of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, could reshape economies, politics and security within states. Here are three key takeaways from the research: AI brings breakthroughs in health care, logistics and engineering, but also disrupts jobs and economies. Unmanaged disruption can fuel instability, widening inequality and increasing risks of unrest or domestic conflict. Governments must act now with retraining, adaptive policies and strong governance to harness AI’s benefits while reducing risks. Lance Hunter, PhD, is an assistant professor of political science with a background in international relations. His research focuses on how terrorist attacks influence politics in democratic countries and how political decisions within countries affect conflicts worldwide. Hunter teaches courses in international relations, security studies and research methods. He received his PhD in Political Science from Texas Tech University in 2011. View his profile here. Craig Albert, PhD, is a professor of Political Science and the graduate director of the PhD in Intelligence, Defense, and Cybersecurity Policy and the Master of Arts in Intelligence and Security Studies at Augusta University. His areas of concentration include international security studies, cybersecurity policy, information warfare/influence operations/propaganda, ethnic conflict, cyberterrorism and cyberwar, and political philosophy. View his profile here. The question we face is not whether AI will transform society (it already is!) but how we will manage that transformation to strengthen rather than destabilize. What steps do you think policymakers should prioritize to prepare for this future? Here's the abstract from the paper in Research Gate: An emerging field of scholarship in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and computing posits that AI has the potential to significantly alter political and economic landscapes within states by reconfiguring labor markets, economies and political alliances, leading to possible societal disruptions. Thus, this study examines the potential destabilizing economic and political effects AI technology can have on societies and the resulting implications for domestic conflict based on research within the fields of political science, sociology, economics and artificial intelligence. In addition, we conduct interviews with 10 international AI experts from think tanks, academia, multinational technology companies, the military and cyber to assess the possible disruptive effects of AI and how they can affect domestic conflict. Lastly, the study offers steps governments can take to mitigate the potentially destabilizing effects of AI technology to reduce the likelihood of civil conflict and domestic terrorism within states. Read the full report here: Looking to know more? Let us help. Both Albert and Hunter are available to speak with media. Simply click on either experts icon now to arrange an interview today.
Dr. Sameer Hinduja is one of the world’s foremost experts on cyberbullying, adolescent mental health, and digital safety. A Professor at Florida Atlantic University’s School of Criminology and Criminal Justice and Co-Director of the Cyberbullying Research Center, he has advised the White House, testified before federal agencies, and worked with schools and tech companies worldwide to protect young people online. View Full Profile→ Amid the U.S. youth mental health crisis, his latest peer-reviewed study, published through FAU Newsdesk, reveals that hope not only boosts well-being and academic achievement but also acts as a powerful shield against bullying and cyberbullying in adolescents. Results, published in the journal Frontiers in Sociology, show that students with less hope were 56% more likely to cyberbully others than their peers over their lifetime, and 57% more likely over the last 30 days. Those with more hope were 36% less likely to cyberbully others over their lifetime and over the last 30 days when compared to their peers with lower levels of hope. The key takeaway? Hope matters. It buffers against the urge to aggress against others online and off. “Hope acts as a powerful protective factor against both school bullying and cyberbullying among youth,” said Sameer Hinduja, Ph.D., lead author, a professor in the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice within FAU’s College of Social Work and Criminal Justice, co-director of the Cyberbullying Research Center, and a faculty associate at the Berkman Klein Center at Harvard University. “When young people believe in their ability to set meaningful goals and stay motivated to reach them, they are far less likely to lash out or harm others. Hope gives them a sense of direction – and that can make all the difference.” Hinduja's previous research has been featured in The Washington Post, where he emphasized that cyberbullying is not just emotionally distressing—it can cause trauma responses in teens that mirror clinical Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. “As our research clearly shows, cyberbullying in any form — whether it’s exclusion from a group chat or direct threats — can lead to significant trauma in youth,” Sameer Hinduja, a professor in Florida Atlantic University’s School of Criminology and Criminal Justice and the paper’s lead author, said in a news release. “We were surprised to find that no single type of cyberbullying caused more harm than others; all carried a similar risk of traumatic outcomes. This means we can’t afford to dismiss or trivialize certain behaviors as ‘less serious’ — being left out or targeted by rumors can be just as detrimental as more overt attacks.” Why This Matters Now As students return to school this fall, Hinduja’s research offers a clear reminder: digital harm is real harm. Emotional safety in online environments deserves the same urgency as physical safety in school buildings. His work calls for: • Preventive education over punitive responses • Trauma-informed approaches in schools • Support systems that validate and protect victims • Tech accountability and policy reform ⸻ Dr. Hinduja is available for media interviews on topics such as: Adolescent Mental Health • Cyberbullying • PTSD • Digital Safety • School Culture Click on the icon below to connect.
New research reveals how religious tattoos reflect a cultural – and generational – shift in how faith is expressed through permanent body art. Dr. Kevin D. Dougherty, professor of sociology at Baylor University, brings a unique lens to this evolving phenomenon. An award-winning educator and active researcher, Dougherty teaches both undergraduates and graduate students in areas of sociology, including courses on religion, teaching and organizational life. His research explores religious affiliation, participation, racial diversity in congregations and the ways faith intersects with politics, work and community. In a recent study published in the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Dougherty and his co-authors – Texas Tech sociology professors Jerome R. Koch, Ph.D. and Paticia Maloney, Ph.D. – examine how tattoos—once seen as rebellious—are now being embraced as spiritual markers, particularly among younger generations. The study used national data from the 2021 Baylor Religion Survey, administered by Gallup to a random sample of 1,248 U.S. adults. The findings reveal that nearly 10% of American adults have tattoos with religious or spiritual significance – suggesting a major cultural shift in how lived religion is publicly and permanently expressed. “What we’re seeing is that tattoos are becoming modern-day sacred objects,” said Koch. “They’re permanent, deeply personal and often worn as both a proclamation of faith and a private reminder of belief.” The research challenges longstanding stereotypes that religious individuals avoid tattoos. While highly religious adults remain slightly less likely overall to be tattooed, younger people with strong religious commitment were the most likely to mark their faith visibly and permanently on their bodies. The study also points to a broader evolution in faith practices. Tattoos are now joining other forms of spiritual expression like jewelry and clothing—but with one major distinction: permanence. “A religious tattoo doesn’t come off. It travels with you,” said Dougherty. “It encourages continuity, a lasting connection to what you believe.” Dougherty’s interest in the topic was sparked during a classroom assignment, where students were asked to document tattoos on campus. He was struck by how many were linked to religious themes. “Tattoos that once marked the fringes of respectable society are now being redeemed as testimonies of belief,” he said. “They’re a reminder that faith—like culture—is always adapting, always finding new ways to speak.” For media inquiries and to connect with Kevin, click the icon below.
Immigrants in the United States earn 10.6% less than similarly educated U.S.-born workers, largely because they are concentrated in lower-paying industries, occupations and companies, according to a major new study published July 16 in Nature, co-authored by a University of Massachusetts Amherst sociologist who studies equal opportunity in employment. The research—one of the most comprehensive global comparisons of immigrant labor market integration to date—analyzes linked employer-employee data from over 13 million people across nine advanced economies in Europe and North America. The U.S. results, drawn from a unique combination of Census Bureau, earnings and employer data, reveal that only about one-quarter of the wage gap is due to pay inequality within the same job and company. Instead, the majority stems from structural barriers that limit immigrants’ access to better-paying workplaces. “These findings are important because they show that most of the immigrant wage gap isn’t about being paid less for the same work—it’s about not getting into the highest-paying jobs and firms in the first place,” says Donald Tomaskovic-Devey, professor of sociology and founding director of the Center for Employment Equity at UMass Amherst Key U.S. Findings First-generation immigrants with legal status in the U.S. earn 10.6% less than comparable native-born workers. 3.4%, a third of that gap, is attributable to unequal pay for the same job at the same employer. No data was available on second-generation immigrants in the U.S., but other countries showed persistent but smaller gaps into the next generation. The study suggests that efforts to close immigrant wage gaps should focus on increasing immigrants’ access to better jobs and firms. Promising approaches include: Language and skills training Recognition of foreign credentials Access to professional networks Employer anti-bias interventions “Improving job access is essential,” says co-author Andrew Penner, professor of sociology at the University of California, Irvine. “This means addressing the barriers that keep immigrants out of the highest-paying firms and occupations.” As of 2023, immigrants constituted approximately 14% of the U.S. population, totaling over 47 million people. There are approximately 1 million new long-term permanent residents annually. U.S. immigration policy encompasses diverse pathways, including family-based migration, employment-based visas, the Diversity Visa Lottery and humanitarian protection. Immigration has been a defining feature of the U.S. population since its founding, with distinct waves shaped by economic needs, political developments and global conflicts. “For almost 250 years, we have been a nation of immigrants, and this pay gap indicates that we can do more as a country to help people following the paths of our forebears realize the American dream,” Tomaskovic-Devey adds. Global Comparison The study includes 13.5 million individuals in nine immigrant-receiving countries: the U.S., Canada, France, Germany, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Spain and Sweden. The U.S. had one of the smallest pay gaps (10.6%) among the nine countries studied. By contrast, Canada showed a 27.5% gap and Spain a 29.3% gap. The most favorable outcomes for immigrants were in Sweden (7% gap) and Denmark (9.2%). The authors identify two main sources of the immigrant-native pay gap: Sorting—Immigrants are more likely to work in lower-paying industries, occupations and firms. Within-job inequality—In all countries immigrants are paid less than natives doing the same job for the same employer, but these gaps are relatively small. Across the nine countries, three-quarters of the 17.9% average wage gap for immigrants was due to sorting; just one-quarter stemmed from unequal pay within jobs. In the U.S., this pattern was consistent: structural job access—not wage discrimination—was the dominant force. The study also exposes persistent disadvantages for immigrants from certain world regions, including Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America and the Middle East. Across all countries, immigrants from these regions faced larger wage gaps than immigrants from Western or Asian countries. The international research is the latest in a series of high-profile publications from a team spanning over a dozen countries in North America and Europe that has been investigating the dynamics of workplace earnings distributions for the last decade.
Expert Perspective: The Hidden Costs of Cultural Appropriation
In our interconnected world, cultural borrowing is everywhere. But why do some instances earn applause while others provoke outrage? This question is becoming increasingly crucial for business leaders who must carefully navigate cultural boundaries. Take the backlash the Kardashian-Jenner family faced for adopting styles from minority cultures or the controversy over non-Indigenous designers using Native American patterns in fashion. These examples highlight the issue of cultural appropriation, where borrowing elements from another culture without genuine understanding or respect can lead to accusations of exploitation. Abraham Oshotse, an assistant professor of organization and management at Goizueta Business School, along with Assistant Professor of Sociology and Anthropology at Hebrew University Yael Berda and Associate Professor of Organizational Behavior at the Stanford Graduate School of Business Amir Goldberg, explores this in their research on “cultural tariffing.” They shed light on why high-status individuals, such as celebrities or industry leaders, often come under fire when crossing cultural boundaries. The Concept of Cultural Tariffing Oshotse and coauthors define cultural tariffing as “the act of imposing a social cost on cultural boundary crossing. It is levied on high-status actors crossing into low-status culture, in order to mitigate the reproduction of the status inequality.” This notion suggests that the acceptance or rejection of cultural boundary-crossing is influenced by the perceived costs and benefits. Cultural appropriation involves taking elements from a culture that one does not belong to, without permission or authority. For example, when Elvis Presley brought African-American music into the mainstream, it was initially seen as elevating the genre. However, in today’s context, such acts might be criticized as appropriation rather than celebration. This research seeks to analyze people’s modern reactions to different examples of cultural boundary-crossing and which conditions induce cultural tariffing. The Hypotheses The researchers make four hypotheses about participants’ reactions to cultural appropriation: People will disapprove of cultural borrowing if there’s a clear power imbalance, with the borrowing group having more status or privilege than the group they are borrowing from. Cultural borrowing is more likely to be criticized if the person doing it has a higher socioeconomic status within their social group. Cultural borrowing is more likely to be criticized if the person doing it has only a shallow connection to the culture they’re borrowing from. Cultural borrowing is more likely to be criticized if the person doing it benefits more from it than the people from the culture they are borrowing from. Put to the Test Oshotse et al exposed respondents to four scenarios per hypothesis (16 total) with a permissible and a transgressive condition. In the permissible condition, subjects exhibit lower status or socioeconomic standing or a stronger connection to the target culture. Subjects in the transgressive condition exhibit a higher status or socioeconomic standing and less of an authentic connection to the target culture. Insights from the Study Oshotse’s study offers four key insights: Status Matters: Cultural boundary-crossing is more likely to generate disapproval if there’s a clear status difference favoring the adopter. Superficial Connections: The less authentic the adopter’s connection to the target culture, the more likely they are to face backlash. Socioeconomic Influence: Higher socioeconomic status within the adopter’s social group increases the likelihood of disapproval. Value Extraction: The more value the adopter gains relative to the culture they’re borrowing from, the higher the disapproval. These insights are crucial for leaders who want to navigate cultural boundaries successfully, ensuring their actions are seen as respectful and inclusive rather than exploitative. Real-World Implications for Business Leaders Why does this matter for business leaders? Understanding cultural tariffing is crucial when expanding into new markets, launching multicultural campaigns, or even managing diverse teams. The research suggests that crossing cultural boundaries without deep understanding or respect can backfire. That’s especially true when the adopter holds a higher socioeconomic status. Consider the example of a luxury brand adopting traditional African patterns without engaging with the communities behind them. In this case, it risks being seen as exploitative rather than innovative. The consequences aren’t just reputational; they can also impact the brand’s bottom line. This research isn’t just about isolated incidents; it mirrors sweeping societal shifts. Over the past 50 years, Western views have evolved to embrace ethnic diversity and multicultural exchange. But with this newfound appreciation comes a fresh set of challenges. Today’s leaders must navigate cultural interactions with greater care, fully aware of the historical and social contexts that shape perceptions of appropriation. In today’s global and interconnected business landscape, mastering the subtleties of cultural appropriation and tariffing is crucial. Leaders who tread thoughtfully can boost their reputation and success, while those who falter may face serious backlash. By understanding the hidden costs of crossing cultural boundaries, business leaders can cultivate authentic exchanges and steer clear of the pitfalls of appropriation. Abraham Oshotse is an assistant professor of organization & management. He is available speak to media regarding this important topic - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
The hidden consequences of school suspensions: Insights from 'Suspended Education'
School suspensions have long been a traditional disciplinary strategy used by educational institutions to address behavioral issues. Often perceived as a straightforward solution to handle disruptive conduct, suspensions remove the student from the school environment, theoretically allowing learning to proceed unhindered. University of Delaware sociology professor Aaron Kupchik explores school suspensions in his new book ‘Suspended Education: School Punishment and the Legacy of Racial Injustice.' He looks at how this practice is intrinsically tied to racial inequality and can have negative long-term impacts on students. He notes that beneath this seemingly effective measure, a multitude of unintended consequences lurk, some of which profoundly affect both the individual student and the broader community. And often, there is more harm than good done by this measure, particularly for students of color. Kupchik has appeared in a number of outlets including Time magazine and Delaware Public Media. He can be reached by clicking on his profile.
University of Delaware experts exploring Black and brown history and topics all year long
While Black History Month officially ended on Friday, the topic is one that is always top of mind for many professors and experts here at the University of Delaware. Below are a small list of these experts and the areas they explore throughout the year. Click on their profiles or email mediarelations@udel.edu to connect. Roderick Carey, associate professor in the Department of Human Development and Family Sciences, can discuss the importance of gender and race diversity in teaching. Ann Aviles and Ohiro Oni-Eseleh, both professors in the College of Education and Human Development, can share resources for displaced families and guidance for parents, educators and other community members who want to support them. Yasser Payne, professor of sociology, examines notions of resilience, structural violence and gun violence with Black Americans.
