This article investigates the extent to which teens are ready to take advantage of the Computer Science for All (CS4All) initiative promoted in 2016 by the Obama administration. Using new survey data from a socioeconomically stratified random sample of eighth graders in regular neighborhood schools in Chicago, author Cassidy Puckett looks at differences in students' technology learning readiness, operationalized as the use of five technology learning habits, and home and school resources and practices that explain these differences. Findings show that students vary in their technology learning readiness, which suggests the need for intervention before high school, and that families shape readiness, but schools largely do not. This study contributes to debates about schools' relationship to inequality by identifying a mechanism through which policies can inadvertently exacerbate inequities without understanding and addressing readiness; it also offers possible methods for interventions in schools.

No abstract

Background/Context Many schools no longer track classes to increase access to courses at all levels, including science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects. However, informal processes can “de facto” track students, placing them at the same level across subjects. Research shows that de facto tracking is prevalent in STEM, especially between mathematics and science course placements. Less is known about the relationship between mathematics and engineering—the focus of this study. Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study Mathematics placement is likely to shape participation in engineering given its position under the STEM umbrella. Yet, de facto tracking does not occur all the time. This may depend on the categorization of courses as “academic” or “vocational,” but there is little research about this aspect of course-to-student matching. Therefore, we investigate an unexpected case of equitable participation where mathematics placement does not de facto track students in engineering. We ask: How do institutional and organizational factors shape the absence of de facto tracking? Research Design We used qualitative data drawn from a two-year mixed-methods study in a public high school district with one large comprehensive high school. The school is in the lower third of per pupil spending in the state of Massachusetts, yet has significant engineering-related course offerings. Located near Boston, it serves an economically and racially diverse student body of ∼1,800 students. For this article, we analyzed 998 hours of observations during and after school, in engineering-related elective courses and extracurricular activities, and interviews with 29 students, 31 teachers, six guidance counselors, two district administrators, and the principal. Findings/Results We find competing vocational and academic logics equally frame engineering, which we call “institutional ambiguity.” This dual framing is present at the institutional level and is supported at the school level by three organizational factors: 1) courses and activities that occur in both vocational and academic spaces, 2) teachers who link vocational and academic fields, and 3) an organizational commitment to support the integration of vocational activities. Conclusions/Recommendations Overall, this article contributes to educational and organizational research by identifying the institutional factors and organizational processes that shape the categorization of courses and student-to-course matching. Our research reveals the conditions under which schools and the actors within them have greater agency, where ambiguity in the broader environment allows for contestation and renegotiation of status hierarchies. We argue that by leveraging ambiguity, schools may avoid contributing to inequity in STEM.

No abstract

Objective: Real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is effective for diabetes management in cases of type 1 diabetes and adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) but has not been assessed in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with T2D. The objective of this pilot interventional study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of real-time CGM use in AYAs with T2D. Methods: Adolescents and young adults (13-21 years old) with T2D for six months or more and hemoglobin A1c (A1c) greater than 7%, on any Food and Drug Administration–approved treatment regimen, were included. After a blinded run-in period, participants were given access to a real-time CGM system for 12 weeks. The use and acceptability of the real-time CGM were evaluated by sensor usage, surveys, and focus group qualitative data. Results: Participants’ (n = 9) median age was 19.1 (interquartile range [IQR] 16.8-20.5) years, 78% were female, 100% were people of color, and 67% were publicly insured. Baseline A1c was 11.9% (standard deviation ±2.8%), with median diabetes duration of 2.5 (IQR 1.4-6) years, and 67% were using insulin. Seven participants completed the study and demonstrated statistically significant improvement in diabetes-related quality of life, with the mean Pediatric Quality of Life inventory (PedsQL) diabetes score increasing from 70 to 75 after using CGM ( P = .026). Focus group results supported survey results that CGM use among AYAs with T2D is feasible, can improve quality of life, and has the potential to modify behavior. Conclusion: Real-time CGM is feasible and acceptable for AYAs with T2D and may improve the quality of life of patients with diabetes. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed to assess the effects on glycemic control and healthy lifestyle changes.