FSW481 Sinclair Community Adolescents and Their Parents Family Study Paper I have posted the reading material below. One is the PDF copy, another one is th

FSW481 Sinclair Community Adolescents and Their Parents Family Study Paper I have posted the reading material below. One is the PDF copy, another one is the document(both are the same content).Question need to be answered:In addition to the class disparities mentioned already, what other populations, groups, or family types are underrepresented in this chapter? How does this compare with what was discussed in your earlier readings about representation and the lack of data on minority populations?Potentially helpful note: this book was published in 2014. Santos, C. E., & Toomey, R. B. (2018). Integrating an intersectionality lens in theory and
research in developmental science. In C. E. Santos & R. B. Toomey (Eds.), Envisioning the
Integration of an Intersectional Lens in Developmental Science. New Directions for Child and
Adolescent Development, 161, 7–15.
1
Integrating an Intersectionality Lens in
Theory and Research in Developmental
Science
Carlos E. Santos, Russell B. Toomey
Abstract
This article discusses key issues in the integration of an intersectionality lens
in the developmental sciences and introduces a peer-reviewed thematic journal
issue on this topic. We begin by briefly situating the importance of an intersectionality lens within the changing demographics and sociopolitical history
in the United States, and within developmental science as a field. We provide
a brief overview of recommendations on responsible use of intersectionality in
developmental science. We then introduce contributions contained within this
volume, and how each contributor grappled with the following question: How
can an intersectionality perspective inform the developmental phenomena
of interest and particular developmental theories you draw upon in your
area of research? We end by noting that these contributions offer a collection of
manuscripts that aim to increase dialogue among developmental scientists on
ways to productively integrate an intersectionality lens in developmental science. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR CHILD AND ADOLESCENT DEVELOPMENT, no. 161, Fall 2018 © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). • DOI: 10.1002/cad.20245
7
8
ENVISIONING THE INTEGRATION OF AN INTERSECTIONAL LENS
Introduction
I
nequities affecting those most vulnerable in the United States and
abroad call for greater attention in scholarly and public arenas to the
intersecting experiences of oppression experienced by individuals who
embody various forms of diversity such as racial, ethnic, linguistic, sexual, gender, (dis)ability, geospatial, and socioeconomic diversity. Several recent and current events bring to the forefront the impact of intersecting and
overlapping systems of oppressions and inequities, such as police brutality
resulting in the deaths of several young Black men and women, the murders of transgender women of color, increasing evidence of school pushout
among diverse youth, and growing economic disparities among young people in the United States. An intersectionality lens can help us better attend to
overlapping systems of oppression that are associated with these alarming
patterns. At its core, intersectionality perspectives have argued that multiple
systems of oppression (e.g., heterosexism, racism, ableism, etc.) intersect to
shape individual’s lives by perpetuating certain inequities and affordances
(see Collins, 1989, Combahee River Collective, 1977, Davis, 1983; Crenshaw, 1989; hooks, 1981; Lorde, 1984, for a limited sample of this scholarship). A small but growing number of psychologists have argued for the
urgent need for an intersectionality lens; however, these calls are often not
situated within the developmental sciences (e.g., Cole, 2009). Indeed, the
relative absence of an intersectionality lens in the developmental sciences
stands in stark contrast to other social science fields such as counseling
psychology, education, legal scholarship, public health, sociology and social work (Collins & Bilge, 2016). This special issue was formed to bring
together developmental scientists who are actively theorizing about and/or
incorporating aspects of intersectionality scholarship into their areas of developmental research. Drawing on empirical and theoretical examples, this
special issue offers a lively discussion of how developmental science can
transform itself to better attend to intersecting oppressions, and the role
that this integration has in furthering our understanding of development,
risk, and resilience. We asked contributors to address the following question
in their respective contributions: How can an intersectionality perspective inform the developmental phenomena of interest and particular developmental
theories you draw upon in your area of research?
Although popular theories in developmental science, such as Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological systems theory, highlight the ways in which individuals are embedded within multiple systems, these perspectives often
lack emphasis on the intersecting structural oppressions that shape daily interactions, and perpetuate inequities or foster resilience. Ecological systems
theory is perhaps one of the most widely used frameworks to understand
how young peoples’ own characteristics and attributes interact in reciprocal
ways with a series of multilayered contexts and systems that they inhabit
(microsystem to chronosystem) to inform development. For example, this
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR CHILD AND ADOLESCENT DEVELOPMENT • DOI: 10.1002/cad
INTEGRATING AN INTERSECTIONALITY LENS IN THEORY AND RESEARCH
9
framework is commonly used to assess how interpersonal experiences of,
for example, discrimination contribute to the well-documented health, academic, and developmental disparities that exist for groups of young people
who belong to groups that are marginalized in the larger society (Cabrera & The SRCD Ethnic and Racial Issues Committee, 2013). While it is
important to understand how development occurs within these microsystems and beyond, traditional frameworks in developmental science often
emphasize universality, thereby neglecting the considerable within-group
heterogeneity that exists, and lack emphasis on the structural oppressions
that shape daily interactions and perpetuate inequities (Syed, Santos, Yoo,
& Juang, in press). Further, these contexts of development are typically
treated in a static fashion, at times void of attention to power dynamics
within society such as issues concerning access to safety and health care,
issues affecting those who are undocumented, to name a few. Structural
oppressions are often maintained and perpetuated by the interactions of
microsystems (family, school), macrosystems (homophobia, heterosexism,
misogyny, transphobia, racism, etc.) and chronosystems (historical trends
and shifts affecting marginalized populations, globalization forces, etc.). Beyond disparities, it is also important to understand the intersectional nature
of resilience among young people who are chronically exposed to structural
oppressions yet have better outcomes than expected.
Additionally, and perhaps most important to this special issue, while
developmental theories and frameworks do exist that attend to issues of interpersonal and structural oppressions to varying degrees (e.g., Garcia Coll
and colleagues’ Integrative Model for the Study of Developmental Competencies in Minority Children, 1996; Meyer’s Minority Stress Model, 2003;
Spencer’s Phenomenology and Ecological Systems Theory, 1995), they are
often applied to a focus on one particular axis, rather than attempting to explain the diverse axes of oppression experienced within and across groups of
young people. Importantly, the same contexts can be experienced by young
people in distinct and unique ways that are dependent on the multitude of
position(s) youth hold. If we are to tackle ways to address critical issues
affecting diverse youths of today (e.g., lack of access to opportunities), we
must confront the ways in which developmental science can transform itself to better address the structural oppressions that shape developmental
inequities, and the intersecting nature of these oppressions.
Further, intersectionality presents challenges in terms of methods and
measurement as well. The methods used in the developmental sciences
have heavily relied on between-group or within-group comparisons focused
on a single aspect of a young person’s life (e.g., ethnic–racial discrimination
among youth of color or heterosexist experiences among queer youth),
rather than the amalgamation of oppressions that they experience (e.g.,
racism and heterosexism among queer youth of color). While some existing
measures attend explicitly to intersectional experiences—e.g., Sarno, Mohr,
Jackson, and Fassinger (2015) measures capturing conflicts in allegiances
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR CHILD AND ADOLESCENT DEVELOPMENT • DOI: 10.1002/cad
10
ENVISIONING THE INTEGRATION OF AN INTERSECTIONAL LENS
to one’s sexual and ethnic–racial identities and perceived racism in the
LGB community—most measures assess experiences with discrimination,
for example, related to one aspect of one’s identity (e.g., ethnic–racial
discrimination, discrimination directed at sexual minorities, etc.). This
approach assumes a monolithic experience of discrimination; that is, that
all genders experience similar forms of discrimination attributed to race;
yet, recent research demonstrates that experiences of discrimination are
more nuanced (see, e.g., Lewis & Neville’s [2015] construct of gendered
racism). Finally, the translation of research to practice framed by an
intersectionality lens is lacking. For example, intervention strategies
that are designed to combat one-ism but that do not take into account
within-group variability of experiences will likely be ineffective for youth
who hold multiple oppressed identities.
Cole (2009) posits that in order to conduct intersectionality-inspired
research, psychologists must consider three questions of their work:
(1) Who is included within the categories they study? (2) What role
does inequality play in affecting the categories/individuals/groups that are
studied?, and (3) What are the similarities? Calls for a greater focus on
intersectionality are pushing developmental science to consider these issues. Building on this momentum, the focus of each contribution presented
in this issue captures how an intersectionality perspective complicates traditional understandings of how individuals develop and thrive in societal
systems of oppression. The papers in this issue build on Cole’s (2009) contribution to psychological use of intersectionality by centering these efforts
with rich examples grounded in the developmental sciences. This set of
manuscripts also build on previous work by psychologists, including developmental psychologists, on intersectionality and its applications to contemporary issues that require better theoretical and empirical articulation
in research in developmental science (e.g., Azmitia, Syed, & Radmacher,
2008; Ghavami, Katsiaficas, & Rogers, 2016; Santos & VanDaalen, 2016;
Shields, 2008).
Promoting Responsible Use of Intersectionality in
Developmental Science
Given a history of inadequate use and implementation in the psychological
sciences of intersectionality’s main tenets and ideas (see Moradi & Grzanka,
2017), we infuse Moradi and Grzanka’s (2017) recommendations for using intersectionality responsibly. Further, we reflect on Rosenthal’s (2016)
recommendations for how intersectionality may be used to promote social
justice and equity, and how these insights may have special relevance to
developmental scientists’ use of intersectionality. We discuss these recommendations by briefly highlighting key issues that are important to consider
when applying intersectionality perspectives to the study of development.
First, we share the perspective that it is critical that developmental scientists
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR CHILD AND ADOLESCENT DEVELOPMENT • DOI: 10.1002/cad
INTEGRATING AN INTERSECTIONALITY LENS IN THEORY AND RESEARCH
11
interested in applying intersectionality to their work closely examine and
credit the work done by Black feminists and women of color scholars and
activists, many identified as queer, and who played a critical role in shaping what we now call intersectionality. These activists and scholars contributed critical knowledge and action by, for example, challenging single
identity politics in the context of the civil rights and feminist movement
in the United States, and by helping develop intersectionality’s critical insight of how systemic inequalities overlap and are interdependent, with implications for communities and individuals’ lives (see Collins, 1989, Combahee River Collective, 1977, Davis, 1983; Crenshaw, 1989; hooks, 1981;
Lorde, 1984, for a limited sample of this scholarship). Chicana feminists
extended intersectional perspectives and activism within and outside of
the United States (Anzaldu?a, 1987), particularly in relation to the United
States–Mexico context and intersecting experiences across its borderlands.
Intersectionality challenges conventional ways of thinking about systemic and analytic strategies for conducting developmental research. This
perspective emerged outside of psychology and is a product of transdisciplinary collaborations within and outside the academy. The interdependent
nature of systemic oppressions cannot, and should not, be viewed as favoring one scientific paradigm or praxis over another. In developmental
science, this means grappling with the opportunities and limitations of traditional scientific and methodological paradigms and collaborations. Intersectionality scholars push developmental scholars to see that the application of traditional scientific methods of theory-testing, for example, which
is common in the developmental sciences, are both an asset and a liability.
We view it as an asset because we believe that intersectionality’s claims are
testable using our methods and tools, yet, a liability because the oversimplification of lived experiences and complex constructs and processes inherent
in our traditional methods may obscure the potential of intersectionality to
the developmental sciences.
Additionally, as Rosenthal (2016) notes, incorporating intersectionality into (developmental) psychology “offers the opportunity to incorporate
social justice and equity agendas more centrally in all aspects of our work”
(p. 478). This means that to engage with the structural call inherent in doing
intersectionality, we must consider how we can address the interdependent
and overlapping nature of systemic oppressions not only in our research,
but also in our teaching, service, and community embeddedness (see FewDemo, 2014, for more on this topic).
An Introduction to the Contributions Contained
in This Special Issue
We offer a brief summary of how authors provide insights into how
intersectionality informs their particular areas of research, starting with
(1) how intersectionality can inform developmental research on critical
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR CHILD AND ADOLESCENT DEVELOPMENT • DOI: 10.1002/cad
12
ENVISIONING THE INTEGRATION OF AN INTERSECTIONAL LENS
consciousness; (2) how intersectionality might help us better understand
the meaning(s) individuals attach to, and how they experience social responsibilities in their lives; (3) how intersectionality can inform settingslevel research; (4) the ways in which intersectionality integrates with other
dominant perspectives in the developmental sciences such as Spencer’s phenomenological variant of ecological systems theory (PVEST) in order to
better understand identity development; and (5) Meyer’s minority stress to
better understand neurobiological processes. Thus, the issue moves through
a series of examples of how developmental scientists are beginning to tackle
the call for an integration of intersectionality perspectives.
In the second article in this volume, Erin B. Godfrey and Esther
Burson highlight the growing body of developmental research on critical
consciousness, which captures how youth marginalized by society critically evaluate societal inequities and act to change it (Freire, 1973; Watts,
Diemer, & Voight, 2011). Increasingly, this work has linked greater critical consciousness with better mental health, educational and occupational
outcomes (Diemer et al., 2010; McWhirter & McWhirter, 2015; Olle &
Fouad, 201; Zimmerman, Ramirez-Valles, & Maton, 1999). Godfrey and
Burson outline at least three ways this area of research can benefit from
intersectionality: (1) by focusing on marginalizing systems, rather than
marginalized individuals; (2) conceptualizing and examining multiple systems of oppression; and (3) paying greater attention to sociohistorical
knowledge.
In the third article, Dalal Katsiaficas brings attention to a growing area
of developmental research that is particularly prominent in research on immigrants: social responsibility, or a sense of responsibility and duty that
extends beyond the self (Wray-Lake & Syvertsen, 2011). Katsiaficas highlights that extant literature in this area focuses on single-axis (Bowleg, 2008)
static demographic features such as ethnic group differences in values of
social responsibilities. Drawing on intersectionality, Katsiaficas highlights
how an intersectionalityapproach could more meaningfully attend to the
ways in which ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, immigration, and
documentation status come together to shape experiences of social responsibilities.
In the fourth article, Amanda Roy highlights the ways in which intersectionality can advance settings-level research. Focusing on how development unfolds within the context of neighborhoods, in particular, Roy (1)
describes how intersectionality may manifest itself within settings, (2) how
intersectionality can inform our understanding of how individuals experience settings, and (3) how overlapping systems of oppression that exist
across multiple settings impact development.
In the fifth article, Gabriel Velez and Margaret Beale Spencer delve into
an integration of intersectionality and the Spencer’s (1995) Phenomenology and Ecological Systems Theory (PVEST) to better understand identity development. PVEST is a framework that aims to highlight social,
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR CHILD AND ADOLESCENT DEVELOPMENT • DOI: 10.1002/cad
INTEGRATING AN INTERSECTIONALITY LENS IN THEORY AND RESEARCH
13
historical, and cultural context in which youths develop, and their selfappraisals. Velez and Spencer consider intersectionality’s fore fronting of
complex structures and social positionality—that power dynamics and interconnected systems lead to differential outcomes within socially constructed categories like class, race, and gender (e.g., Eagly & Wood, 1999;
Lott, 2002). They reveal that PVEST complements these insights through
an attentiveness to phenomenological interpretations and responses—the
“how” and “why” of the identity process. They make a compelling case that
adolescent identity should be understood both from the top (systems) and
the bottom, including how youth interpret and cope with their vulnerability, based upon experiences of interlocking systems of oppression.
In the sixth article, Luis A. Parra and Paul D. Hastings integrate intersectionality with minority stress theory to better attend to stressors affecting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) populations
of color. They note that the current minority stress models predominantly
focus on single categorical social identities and do not account for other
systems and processes of oppression surrounding multiple features of sexuality, race, ethnicity, and gender. Parra and Hastings apply an intersectionality framework to the examination of systems of oppression, associated
with both LGBTQ and Latinx experiences of heterosexism and racism and
the impacts of these interlocking experiences on neurobiological stress regulation.
In the seventh article, Moin Syed and Alex A. Ajayi highlight themes
across contributions and help draw out the implications of intersectionality
for the future of the developmental sciences. We end with a commentary by
Jens Beckmann, an editorial board member of New Directions for Child and
Adolescent Development….
Purchase answer to see full
attachment