Gendered Pathways of Internalizing Problems from Early Childhood to Adolescence and Associated Adolescent Outcomes

Despite trends indicating worsening internalizing problems, characterized by anxiety and depression, there is dearth of research examining gender differences in developmental trajectories of internalizing problems from early childhood to adolescence. Drawing on the UK Millennium Cohort Study (n = 17,206, 49% female), this study examines trajectories of parent-reported, clinically-meaningful (reflecting the top 10%) internalizing problems from ages 3 to 14 years and their early predictors and adolescent outcomes. Group-based modelling revealed three trajectories when examining boys and girls together, but there were significant gender differences. When examining boys and girls separately, four trajectories were identified including two relatively stable trajectories showing either high or low probabilities of internalizing problems. An increasing trajectory was also found for both boys and girls, showing an increasing probability of internalizing problems which continued to rise for girls, but levelled off for boys from age 11. A decreasing trajectory was revealed for boys, while a moderate but stable trajectory was identified for girls. Boys and girls in the increasing and high probability groups were more likely to report a number of problematic outcomes including high BMI, self-harm, low mental wellbeing, depressive symptoms, and low educational motivation than the low group. Girls on the increasing trajectory also reported more cigarette and cannabis use and early sexual activity at age 14 compared to girls on the low trajectory. Findings suggest that intervention strategies take a systemic view, targeting not only internal feelings, but also behaviours potentially associated with later negative outcomes

Who studies STEM subjects at A level and degree in England? An investigation into the intersections between students’ family background, gender and ethnicity in determining choice

The relative lack of students studying post-compulsory STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) subjects is a key policy concern. A particular issue is the disparities in uptake by students’ family background, gender and ethnicity. It remains unclear whether the relationship between student characteristics and choice can be explained by academic disparities, and whether students’ background, gender and ethnicity interact in determining university subject choices, rather than simply having additive effects. I use data from more than 4000 students in England from ‘Next Steps’ (previously the LSYPE) and logistic regression methods to explore the interacting relationships between student characteristics and subject choice. There are four main findings of this study. Firstly, disparities by students’ ethnicity are shown to increase when controlling for prior attainment. Secondly, family background indicators are differentially related to uptake for male and female students, with parents’ social class and education larger predictors of choice than financial resources. Thirdly, gender, ethnicity and family background interact in determining choices. Particularly, as socio-economic position increases, young women are more likely to choose STEM over other high-return subjects. Finally, associations between student characteristics and subject choices, including interactions, largely persisted when accounting for A-level choices. Implications for policy and future research are discussed

University is a non-Muslim experience, you know? The experience is as good as it can be’: Satisfied settling in Muslim students’ experiences and implications for Muslim student voice

We report findings from a cross-institutional investigation testing the applicability of a new concept, ‘satisfied settling’, which describes the ways in which students are unconsciously ‘settling for less’ in terms of their university experiences. The context of exploration for this article was that of Muslim students’ experiences as a critical area which has received little previous focus. Our results describe a staged cognitive process undertaken by students to subconsciously excuse institutional failures to support their religious needs by settling for lower levels of satisfaction. The ‘counter stories’ told by 19 Muslim students (via semi-structured interviews) detail how their voices are heard or silenced around the deep importance of religious provisions in their university experiences. Satisfied settling was ultimately found to translate across institutional contexts, and the applicability of the concept is discussed in extending to other marginalised student groups.</p