Learning classic grounded theory: An account of the journey and advice for new researchers

Graduate students who employ CGT for their theses or dissertations predominantly learn the methodology on their own. As a distinct methodology, CGT is challenging to employ. This challenge increases further when graduate students encounter poor advice from dissertation supervisors who are unfamiliar with the methodology, or attempt to incorporate elements from the many alternative and modified versions of grounded theory presented in the literature. This article provides an account of one student's experience learning CGT to complete her doctoral dissertation. It is hoped that this article will assist other new researchers to anticipate some of the confusion, challenges, and insights, and growth that they may encounter in their first CGT study. The article concludes with advice for new researchers including: seek expertise, engage in community, just do it, know self, and balance challenge and support

Commodifying self: A grounded theory study

Classic grounded theory was used to identify the main concern of students in their senior year of undergraduate study. This concern was conceptualized as responding to the pressure to commodify self. The pressure to commodify self refers to pressure to turn oneself into a valuable product for the knowledge-based economy. There are three responses to this pressure: complying with commodification, resisting commodification, and humanizing commodification. Seven interrelated factors influence the response employed. The theory of commodifying self integrates much existing research on university students and demonstrates that important insights can be gained from alternative approaches to studying students' experiences. The theory provides a direct examination of the consequences of macro level social and economic pressure on students and their learning and can be used to understand and enhance campus environments, curricula, and student services

Political Participation of Ethnic Minorities in the 1980s

Currently political participation, especially voter registration and turnout, varies substantially with ethnicity. Blacks and non-Hispanic whites participate at roughly equal rates, while Latinos and Asian-Americans are substantially less active, this variation may reflect cultural factors, or it may be the spurious product of differences in the distribution of non-ethnic determinants of participation, including socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, variables reflecting immigration history, including citizenship, and measures of group identification. Using data collected in 1984 on samples of California's black, Latino, Asian-American, and non-Hispanic white populations, we conclude that these other variables fully account for lower Latino participation rates. Even with such controls, however, Asian-Americans remain less likely to vote. Although non-citizens participate less than citizens, they do engage in non-electoral activities, Finally, we speculate on the future political impact of Latinos and Asian-Americans, by projecting participation rates under several scenarios

Book review: Children in genocide: Extreme traumatization and affect regulation

The article reviews the book "Children in Genocide: Extreme Traumatization and Affect Regulation," by Suzanne Kaplan