Parents’ Perceptions of Teachers’ Authority and Parental Involvement: The Impact of Communality

This study aimed to examine how the level of communality (communal affiliation) affects parents’ perception of children attending public elementary schools, the concept of teacher authority, and the concept of parental involvement. The study population consisted of 300 parents living in various parts of Israel who agreed to complete a self-reporting anonymous questionnaire. The questionnaire comprised three subsections, two of which were based on previous studies: Scale of parents’ perception of “parental involvement,” which included 44 items, Cronbach’s alpha value was 0.90.; The Scale of parents’ perceptions of the concept of “Teacher’s Authority,” which included 25 items, Cronbach’s alpha value was 0.79; and one was composed primarily for the current study, the Scale of parents’ perception of “Communality Level” which included 19 items, Cronbach’s alpha value was 0.88. The findings were analyzed using structural equation models (SEM). Applying these measures to the current study rendered the following results: RMSEA = 0.007, TLI = 0.995, CFI = 0.99, NFI = 0.904, df = 16, χ² = 16.266, p = 0.435. Hence, the value of 1.01 (x2d⁢f) < 3, the TLI and CFI > 0.95. The research findings indicated that a high level of communality (communal affiliation) among parents predicted high levels of perceived teachers’ authority (β = 0.27) and parental involvement (β = 0.30). By contrast, it was also found that living in the same residential characteristics as the teachers predicted low levels of both perceived teacher authority (β = −0.18) and parental involvement (β = −0.20). As regards the theoretical aspects, it adds a new layer to educational research about the variables that affect perceptions of teacher authority, an issue that has received little attention in the research literature. In terms of its practical applications, the model can help education systems in general and schools, in particular, to formulate policies and take steps to improve the ever-important relationship between the school and the parents. Furthermore, the model clarifies our understanding of and ways to strengthen the teacher’s authority.

How do Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Teachers Experience UK Rural School Communities?

This article examines how lesbian, gay and bisexual teachers in rural schools negotiate their sexual identities within the workplace. Although there has been progress towards LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) inclusion for teachers in urban and suburban schools, this article shows that their rural counterparts often experience their school communities differently. A questionnaire gathered data from school teachers in the United Kingdom identifying as LGBT. Whilst a small number of transgender, gender queer and non-binary teachers completed the questionnaire, it is important to note that these teachers taught only in urban environments. In rural schools, respondents identified only as lesbian, gay or bisexual (LGB). Therefore, LGB is used when referring to the rural respondents in this study and LGBT is used when referring generally to the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community. The experiences of teachers working in rural schools were compared with those working in urban or suburban school settings. Results showed that LGB teachers in rural communities lack the opportunity to speak their identity into existence at school, and often find their personal and professional identities incompatible, leading to low self-worth, depression and anxiety. The article shows that in rural school communities, traditional and conservative rural norms and values are compelling and are often protected at the expense of creating safe and inclusive workplaces for LGB teachers.

Relationship between community-level variables and number of general dentists

BACKGROUND

In this study, the authors used observational data from 2014 to evaluate the association between the number of general dentists and several community characteristics.

METHODS

The authors collected community-level characteristics from secondary sources for all 947 Iowa incorporated communities to study their relationships with the mean number of general dentists per 1,000 population per square mile (population density), the dependent variable. The authors used zero-inflated negative binomial models to examine the association between the dependent and predictor variables.

RESULTS

Only 22.8% of communities had a dentist. Urban, young, well-educated, fluoridated communities with at least 1 elementary school had the highest estimated mean concentration of dentists. Isolated communities with older, less educated adults and lacking fluoridation and an elementary school had the fewest dentists.

CONCLUSIONS

Although population is an important determinant for where a dentist practices, other variables such as urbanization, demographic characteristics, fluoridation status, and presence of at least 1 elementary school are also predictors of the number of dentists in a community.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

These findings provide dental students and young practitioners useful information by highlighting community characteristics that are associated with office locations.

Coping in an HIV/AIDS-dominated context: teachers promoting resilience in schools

This paper explains how teachers in schools function as resources to buoy resilience in the face of human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immune deficiency syndrome-compounded adversities. We draw on participatory reflection and action data from a longitudinal study with teachers (n = 57, 5 males, 52 females) from six schools in three South African provinces. The study tracks the psychosocial support offered by teachers following their participation in the Supportive Teachers, Assets and Resilience project. Verbatim interview transcriptions were thematically analysed and three themes (as well as subthemes and categories) emerged: (i) Teachers use resources to promote resilience in schools [teachers use (a) systems and (b) neighbourhood health and social development services to identify and refer vulnerable cases]; (ii) Teachers form partnerships to promote resilience in schools [teacher partnerships include (a) children and families, (b) community volunteers and (c) community organizations, businesses and government] and (iii) School-based support is offered to vulnerable individuals [by means of (a) vegetable gardens, (b) emotional and health support and (c) capacity development opportunities]. We conclude that teachers can promote resilience in schools by establishing networks with service providers that function across systems to support vulnerable groups. We theorize that the core of systemic networks is relationships, that relationship-driven support networks mitigate the effects of cumulative risk and school-based networks can enable schools to function as resilience-promoting resources.