Proposals to arm teachers with guns have emerged in reaction to high-profile school shootings in the United States. Though controversial, these proposals have gained the support of various policyma...

Public Opinion on Support for Arming Teachers with Guns in the United States

Matewan Before the Massacre: Politics, Coal, and the Roots of Conflict in a West Virginia Mining Community

How We Talked and Common Folks

OF DISSERTATION PULLING THE TRIGGER ON DISARMING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ABUSERS: IMPLEMENTING GUN CONFISCATION POLICY IN URBAN AND APPALACHIAN KENTUCKY The present study investigated why communities differing in culture and resources are willing and able to implement gun confiscation as part of a protective order. Specifically, this study explored whether the perceived risk of intimate partner homicide and gun violence, benefits to engaging in gun confiscation, barriers to gun confiscation, community norms about guns, and community readiness to implement gun confiscation: (a) differ in urban and rural communities, (b) are perceived differently by victim service and justice system key professionals within urban and rural communities, and (c) are related to if a community is able and willing to consistently implement procedures that mandate gun confiscation of abusers as part of a protective order. Interviews, guided by an adapted guiding conceptual framework, were conducted with key professionals (N = 133) who work both in victim services and the justice system from a targeted urban community and four Appalachian communities in Kentucky. First, implementing gun confiscation procedures to disarm abusers in rural communities does not seem likely or feasible compared to the urban community given the lower perceived risk-benefit of gun confiscation, importance of gun culture, and limited resources in the selected rural communities. Second, urban justice system professionals, in comparison to urban victim service professionals, reported fewer barriers to enforcing the gun confiscation policy and were more likely to downplay law enforcement limitations in the community and attribute the ineffectiveness of the gun confiscation policy to reasons outside their control. Third, the perceived risk of intimate partner gun violence was associated with consistently implementing in gun confiscation at the emergency protective order (short-term) level, and the perceived community approval of the policy was associated with engaging in consistent gun confiscation at the domestic violence order (longer-term) level. Fourth, both urban and rural professionals pointed out potential unintended negative consequences to implementing the gun confiscation policy, such as violation of second amendment rights and increased danger for victims who seek protective orders. The results have implications for developing more effective strategies for increasing a community’s ability and motivation to enforce gun policy that keep guns out of the hands of dangerous abusers.

/pdf/pulling-the-trigger-on-disarming-domestic-violence-abusers-1j5jdwpgp0.pdf

Pulling the Trigger on Disarming Domestic Violence Abusers: Implementing Gun Confiscation Policy in Urban and Appalachian Kentucky

Senseless and tragic shootings across communities such as Newtown, Connecticut have riveted public attention on gun control. Bombarded by pro- and anti-gun-control forces, policy makers are often reactionary. Social workers must deal with these policies and the clients who fear them. Social scientists have suggested that cultural world views have greater influence on this issue than any other predictors. A survey of rural Appalachian college students (N=294) explored gun control attitudes in order to consider what makes compromise and consensus on the issue of gun control so difficult. It considers these influences and their implications for rural social workers.

/pdf/gun-control-college-student-attitudes-and-the-meaning-for-5cb87ao8nc.pdf

Gun Control: College Student Attitudes and the Meaning for Appalachian Social Workers

High-stakes exams play a large role in determining an introductory physics student's final grade. These exams have been shown to be inequitable, often to the detriment of students identifying with groups historically marginalized in physics. Given that exams are made up of individual questions, it is plausible that certain types of questions may be contributing to the observed equity gaps. In this paper, we examine whether that is the case for one type of forced-choice question, the complex multiple-choice (CMC) question. In a CMC question, students must select an answer choice that includes all correct responses and no incorrect responses from a list. To conduct our study, we used four years of data from Problem Roulette, an online program at our university that allows students to prepare for exams with actual questions from previous years' exams in a not-for-credit format. We categorized the 951 Physics II (Electricity and Magnetism) questions in the database as CMC or non-CMC. We found that students performed 8.0 percentage points worse on CMC questions than they did on non-CMC questions. In addition, we found differential impacts for low income students and domestic students relative to medium and high income students and international students. Regression models supported these descriptive findings. The results suggest that complex multiple-choice questions may be contributing to the equity gaps observed on physics exams. Considering, however, that CMC questions are more difficult for everyone, future research should examine the source of this difficulty and whether that source is functionally related to learning and assessment. For example, our data does not support using CMC questions instead of non-CMC as a way to differentiate top-performing students from everyone else.

Mark A. Mills

Papers

Gun Control: College Student Attitudes and the Meaning for Appalachian Social Workers

Complex multiple-choice questions are inequitable for low-income and domestic students (and difficult for everyone)