Transcript Document

Losing Their Way: How FirstYear College Boys Find Trouble
on the Way to Becoming Men
John-Paul Wolf, Ph.D.
WACE 2015
Who am I and Where are We?
•
•
•
•
I am a man
I am not the stereotypical
man
Son, husband, and father
I support feminism
Student affairs
practitioner
University of California,
Riverside
• Moderately selective
research university
• Very diverse student
population
• Not a highly privileged
student body
• Mild misconduct
Troubled Boys
• Boys in preschool are suspended or expelled at a rate five time
more than for girls
• Boys in primary education are diagnosed with learning
disorders at a rate four times more than girls
• Boys comprise 58.1% of high school drop outs
• Young men in college are less likely than women to persist
through to graduation
• Young men are more likely to develop unhealthy lifestyles and
social behaviors
• Men seek counseling services 50% less than women
Sources: Burke, 2009; Clayton, 1991; Hewitt & Gaffney, 2004; Davis &
Laker, 2004; Sax & Harper, 2005; Wills & DePaulo, 1991.
The Problem
• Men are overrepresented in the student conduct processes
which may result in the end of their educational career
• Men have historically and persistently disrupted the
educational environment
• Men are socially rewarded for misconduct and have little
motivation to change
• Faculty and administrators lack a base of knowledge on
gender-related stress and conflict experienced by college men
• Student Affairs practitioners lack tools to effectively work with
men
Sources: Bean & Eaton, 2000; Bureau of Applied Social Research, 1964;
Capraro, 2004; Dannells, 1991; Harper, Harris, & Mmeje, 2005; Ludeman,
2004; L. Jackson, 2000; Moore, 1974; Mullins, 2003; Tinto, 1993.
Purpose of the Study
• There has been a lack of scholarly work conducted on the
experiences of male college students
• Theories of power do not explain the troubles of men
• Not asking questions about masculinity and its effects in social
spaces supports the notion of masculine power
• The factors that lead to male student misconduct are unknown
but it has been theorized that attempted achievement of
hegemonic masculinity and gender-role stress may lead to
misconduct
• This investigation addressed the over-representation of male
undergraduate students in the student conduct process
Sources: Capraro, 2004 ; Connell, 1993; Harper, Harris, & Mmeje, 2005;
Harris, 2006
Research Questions
• Does ascribing greater importance to fulfilling hegemonic
masculinity standards and experiencing greater gender role
conflict predict misconduct by first-year first-time male
students?
• What are the causes for adherence to or violation of university
policies?
• How do college men express dominant and alternative
concepts of masculinities?
• In what ways are both the identity development and social
identity development of first-year first-time male students
influenced by conceptions of masculinity?
Gender
• Gender, unlike sex, is socially constructed
• Gender is accomplished through performance of gender
norms
• Individuals display gender by enacting differentiated normal
gender arrangements associated with their gender
• “Doing” gender provides a link to investigating misconduct since
misconduct is based on behavior
• Gender is influenced by family, society, culture, and
institutions and develops in social spaces
• Patterns of behavior weaved into gender define and make
recognizable social interaction and understanding
Sources: Butler, 1999; Connell, 1995; Edwards & Jones, 2009; West &
Zimmerman, 1987
Integrative Model of
Masculinity
Past/Present Influences
Cultural &
Environmental
Biological &
Evolutionary
Social & Familial
Psychological &
Developmental
Source: Meek, 2011
Positive
Reinforcement
An individual
male’s
masculinity
Personality
Gender Role
Self-Concept
Motivation to
Cope and Change
Benefits of
individual style
of masculinity
Costs of
individual style
of masculinity
Hegemonic Masculinity
Norms and values that define the male role
1. “No sissy stuff”
• Avoiding Femininity and Concealing Emotions
2. “The Big Wheel”
• Bread Winner and Achieving Admiration and Respect
3. “Sturdy Oak”
• Toughness and Male Machine
4. “Give ‘em Hell”
• Violence and Adventure
• Masculinity is defined as a configuration of practices organized
in relation to the structure of gender relations
• Umbrella category of masculinity that other subjugated
masculinities fall under and aspire to achieve
Sources: Brannon & Juni, 1984; Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005; Edwards
& Jones, 2009; Thompson, Pleck, & Ferrera, 1992;
Theoretical Orientation
•
•
•
•
•
•
Masculinities
Hegemonic masculinity
Gender role stress and strain
Emerging adulthood
Identity development
Social identity
Sources: Arnett, 2000; Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Berkowitz, 2003; Connell,
1995; Gee, 2000; O'Neil, 1984; Pleck, 1981;
Methodology
• Mixed Methodologies
• Nested qualitative data collection in more robust quantitative data
collection
• Survey data collection using MRNS, GRCS-I, demographic questions
• Interviews conducted during the year
• Outcome data collected from the institution
• Quantitative
• Cumulative odds ordinal logistic regression with proportional odds
model
• Three factors of the MRNS and GRCS-I
• Control variables
• Misconduct served as outcome measure
• Qualitative
• Interviews as qualitative data
Sources: Berg, 2001; Creswell, 2003; O’Neil et al., 1986; Seidman, 2006;
Thompson & Pleck, 1986
Quantitative Data Analysis
•
•
•
•
Representative sample
Relationship between measures
Internal consistency of measures
Cumulative odds ordinal logistic regression with proportional
odds model
• Multicollinearity
• Proportional Odds
• Model fit
Quantitative Findings
• Full model did not predict the misconduct more than the
intercept-only model: χ2(19) = 25.220, p = .153.
• No statistically significant main effects of MRNS or GRCS-I factors
• Athletic involvement had a statistically significant effect on the
prediction of student misconduct, Wald χ2(1) = 4.302, p = .038.
• Interest in joining a fraternity was close to statistical significance
on the prediction student misconduct Wald χ2(1) = 3.407, p = .062
• Reduced model did not predict misconduct more than the
intercept-only model, χ2(14) = 18.992, p = .165.
• Interest to join a fraternity had a significant effect on the
prediction of student misconduct, Wald χ2(1) = 4.103, p = .043.
• Athletic involvement was near significance on the prediction of
whether or not first-year male students would violate university
policy, Wald χ2(1) = 3.708, p = .054
Quantitative Findings
• Fraternity interest and athletics were both correlated with all
MRNS factors and many GRCS-I factors
Athletics
Fraternity
Status
.174**
.236**
Toughness
.172**
.312**
Anti-femininity
.187**
.195**
SPC Score
.114*
.213**
Restrictive Emotionality
-.076
.049
RABBM
.038
.085
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Qualitative Data Analysis
• Content Analysis
• Systematic filing
• Reading  interpreting  identify major topics and sub-topics
• Inductive categories (those identified in the data)
• Deductive categories (those informed by the theoretical perspective
of the investigation
• Coding
•
•
•
•
Ask the data specific and consistent questions
Analyze the data minutely
Interrupt coding to write theoretical notes
Do not assume analytic relevance of traditional variable until
suggested by the data
• Coding Frames
• MRAS, GRCS-I, Emerging Adulthood, Identity Development, Social
Identity
Sources: Berg, 2001; Strauss, 1987
Qualitative Findings
• What are the causes for adherence to or violation of university
policies?
Sammy
“You are going to have to be the bread winner, so you have to figure
out some type of plan to make money, provide, to be a leader in this
world and in society, to your family. You have to stand up for basically
what’s right. You can’t steer left if the positive way is to go right. Like
you have to do what is right. You need to step up and actually live up
to your responsibilities as a man. Work, you need to. You can’t just sit
around and not do anything. You have to be the provider. You’re the
bread winner; you’re the leader. So, whatever you do that’s what
people are going to follow… You’re going out; you’re working; and,
you’re basically being a regulator, making sure that people aren’t
disrespecting the world, people, society, or women. Don’t disrespect
yourself, actually. As a person, you have to have respect for
yourself…[You have to be] a leader, somebody that is positive that
knows what’s right, and who is going do the right thing, when
someone’s looking and when someone’s not looking at them. That’s
what a man is.”
Qualitative Findings
• How do college men express dominant and alternative concepts of
masculinities?
Don
“[O]nce I know they are down I go for the first move. I hug them on the
side and just hold there and keep talking. I keep everything chill. Once
they are ok with that, that tells me like “ok you are in.” Like you are
already inside her. I don’t know what to call it. Like you are already
there. You can keep going because she is ok with it and for me when I
would hook up with chicks in high school that never failed. Once I was
already in their space hugging them and they are hugging me. After
that I knew it was good and be like “this is all mine.””
John
“I am kind of an asshole because I don’t talk to ugly girls”
Arnold
“Definitely a distraction and a waste of time and money.”
Qualitative Findings
• In what ways are both identity development and social identity
development of first-year first-time males student influenced by
conceptions of masculinity?
Ken
“[N]ot everyone is a perfect man. I mean some people they try and
become a better man…I am trying to become more of a “gentleman” or
like “a scholar.” I am trying to become…like, I am lifting weights or working
out so I can get a better body so women will think I am more of a man,
what society would call a man. How people on a day to day basis pursue
being the ultimate man I guess. I think that is a huge pursuit that guys try
and do. Even if they don’t say they do consciously it is just
something…[W]e are always trying to be the best…to be the top dog.
Especially because just how men have a role in the family they always
want to be the top head figure. Everyone wants to be the most successful
whatever; everyone wants to be the strongest.”
Steve
“Why am I close to my friends in high school? Because they were capable
of relating. Why am I distant from my cousins? Because I am not capable
of relating to that sort of subject [machismo aggression]. Where they can
relate to each other.”
Conclusions
• MRNS and GRCS-I did not predict involvement in the
misconduct process, however, they may predict patterns of
behavior that could result in involvement
• Involvement in athletics and intent to join a fraternity may
mediate the influence of masculinity on the outcome
• Hypermasculinity may be better suited to predict involvement
in the misconduct process
• Many men on college campuses possess alternate forms of
masculinity that are informed by hegemonic masculinity but
do not result in misogyny, homophobia, academic misconduct,
drug and alcohol abuse, and violence.
Implications
• We can prepare better men for college
• Development of gender specific resources for men
• Reducing the adversarial environment of student conduct
review meetings
• Increase gender specific programming to reduce the risk of
being involved in the student conduct process
• Increase understanding of the gender related characteristics
of undergraduate male students as they come to college