Mediational Effect of Teacher-Based Discrimination on Academic Performance: An Intersectional Analysis of Race, Gender, and Income/Class

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Applying an intersectional framework and critical quantitative research design, this manuscript explores how race, gender, and income/class intersect in teacher-student relationships, and the impact on African American students. I thank the Editors for the opportunity to review a piece that confirms prior work on the importance of teacher-student relationships in students’ academic self-efficacy, attendance, and GPA. While I did not find the manuscript cutting edge, it reiterates the ongoing need for intersectional-conscious policies and practices in schools as well as how without such policies and practices, schools and teacher-student interactions will continue to be sites of social reproduction. Below, I offer a few general comments for the authors.

Teacher-based discrimination: In their discussion of how teachers affect the transmission of institutional resources, the authors may find useful Stanton-Salazar’s (2011) work on institutional agents (see page 4, lines 108-109). Page 4, line 187 – explain proximal learning ecology for unfamiliar readers.

Methods: While not groundbreaking, the analysis is solid. In the “Data Analysis” section, I recommend the authors add a discussion about how this analysis plan will test hypotheses presented specifically.

Implications: I appreciate that the authors offered practical implications for their findings. How might schools develop absenteeism policies and truancy interventions that are attentive to race, gender, and income/class, particularly in ways that do not call attention to African American students and particularly boys? Additionally, are there examples of policies and practices that deactivate discrimination within the context of student-teacher relationships? That is, what would a race-conscious policy potentially look like? The authors do not discuss future research associated with the study, so perhaps they are suggesting that future research could explore the suggested implications…?

Other comments: Please double-check throughout that: (i) references are in alphabetical order; (ii) all in-text citations are included in the references (e.g., Lewis & Diamond, 2019; Ray, 2019); and (iii) subject-verb agreement (e.g., page 2, line 52 “how racism interact with sexism”). Finally, be consistent with capitalization (or not) of racial categories.

I once again thank the Editors and authors for the opportunity to review this work.

Author Response

Reviewer comment: Teacher-based discrimination: In their discussion of how teachers affect the transmission of institutional resources, the authors may find useful Stanton-Salazar’s (2011) work on institutional agents (see page 4, lines 108-109). Page 4, line 187 – explain proximal learning ecology for unfamiliar readers.

Responses: We thank the reviewer for these helpful comments. Indeed, we find Stanton-Salazar (2011) useful. In the revised version, we have cited the article in few areas in pages 4, 5, & 19 in the yellow highlights.  We have also added some indicators of what we mean by proximal learning ecology on page 8, highlighted in yellow (e.g., classroom arrangement, teacher expectations, how teachers affirm or invalidate the cultural asset and identity of students).

Reviewer: In the “Data Analysis” section, I recommend the authors add a discussion about how this analysis plan will test hypotheses presented specifically.

Response: We do thank the reviewer for this comment. In the revised version, we have included few sentences on page 11, in yellow highlight: 

In this regard, we evaluated the unique and intersectional relations of race, gender, income, self-efficacy, and teacher discrimination with attendance and GPA. Three exogenous variables were race, gender, and income, while endogenous variables were self-efficacy, teacher discrimination, attendance, and GPA. Each of these exogenous variables was hypothesized to be jointly and significantly associated with endogenous variables.

As a preliminary step to applying the structural equation model for the aforementioned hypotheses, the possible clustering effects were first examined to identify whether the variances. 

Reviewer: How might schools develop absenteeism policies and truancy interventions that are attentive to race, gender, and income/class, particularly in ways that do not call attention to African American students and particularly boys? Additionally, are there examples of policies and practices that deactivate discrimination within the context of student-teacher relationships? That is, what would a race-conscious policy potentially look like? The authors do not discuss future research associated with the study, so perhaps they are suggesting that future research could explore the suggested implications…?

Responses: Again, we thank the reviewer for such critical comments. We have offered some suggestions and some context to our suggestions throughout the implications. They are highlighted in yellow in pages 18-20. For example, on the race conscious approach, we suggest that: 

Building teachers racial competencies to the reality that they are agents of racialized institutions that are designed to systematically sustain the racial contract upholding white racial worldview (Feagin, 2020; Kyere et al, in press) will strengthen teachers’ positive relationships with racialized students. Because schools are a subsystem of the racialized system, teachers exist within and mediate racialized structures, interpret these structures, and create meanings that direct behaviors (Leonardo, 2013; Vaught, 2011). Therefore, when teachers are cast as the source of racial discrimination instead of as mediators in the racialization process, it masks and distorts the structures of white supremacy behind educational policies and practices that teachers are expected to execute in the post-Brown vs. Board of Education era. Race-conscious framework can provide teachers with the analytic framework to understand the role of the racialized system to recruit them as its agent. That awareness is important for teachers to engage in practices of transgression against structural racism that empower students through engagement practices that recognize and leverage the cultural and community assets that students of color and those from working-class background bring to the learning context (Sankofa et al., 2023).

Reviewer: Other comments: Please double-check throughout that: (i) references are in alphabetical order; (ii) all in-text citations are included in the references (e.g., Lewis & Diamond, 2019; Ray, 2019); and (iii) subject-verb agreement (e.g., page 2, line 52 “how racism interact with sexism”). Finally, be consistent with capitalization (or not) of racial categories. 

Responses: We again, thank the reviewer for pointing these out. We have corrected the in-text citations (see yellow highlights in pages 1 and 5) and added the appropriate references. We have reframed the statement on page 2 to read: racism and sexism may operate simultaneously to jointly.  We have also changed the racial categories to capitals.  

We have also added a footnote on page 1 to clarify our use of teacher-based discrimination and discrimination via teacher-student context.  

I have uploaded the revised version here. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper talked about the critical issues, race class and gender in education field. The whole paper was quite clearly and logically organized, the opinions were convincing, and the language was fluency. The paper can be accepted in my view.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for reviewing our work and thoughtful comment.