• jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      3 days ago

      Sorry, I meant, what is the article the student read and responded to. The one the student said is thought provoking in their 650 word response.

          • AernaLingus [any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            ·
            3 days ago

            It’s actually 734 words, by my count—the Xcancel link doesn’t make it clear that there’s a reply which contains the closing paragraph (see this comment for a plaintext version).

        • AernaLingus [any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          3 days ago

          Link to the paper (and an actually useful Sci-Hub link)

          Title and abstract

          Relations Among Gender Typicality, Peer Relations, and Mental Health During Early Adolescence

          Jennifer A. Jewell and Christia Spears Brown, University of Kentucky

          Abstract

          The current study examines whether being high in gender typicality is associated with popularity, whether being low in gender typicality is associated with rejection/teasing, and whether teasing due to low gender typicality mediates the association with negative mental health. Middle school children (34 boys and 50 girls) described hypothetical popular and rejected/teased peers, and completed self-report measures about their own gender typicality, experiences with gender-based teasing, depressive symptoms, anxiety, self-esteem, and body image. Participants also completed measures about their peers’ gender typicality, popularity, and likeability. Results indicated that popular youth were described as more gender typical than rejected/teased youth. Further, being typical for one’s gender significantly predicted being rated as popular by peers, and this relationship was moderated by gender. Finally, low gender typicality predicted more negative mental health outcomes for boys. These relationships were, at times, mediated by experiences with gender-based teasing, suggesting that negative mental health outcomes may be a result of the social repercussions of being low in gender typicality rather than a direct result of low typicality.

          Partial assignment description (it's clear this is starting in the middle, and it's possible there is more afterwards)

          There are other possibilities as well. The best reaction papers illustrate that students have read the assigned materials and engaged in critical thinking about some aspect of the article.

          Formatting requirements: 12-point Times New Roman or Calibri font, one-inch margins on all sides.

          GRADING: Reaction papers are graded on a 25-point scale, and are evaluated based on the following:

          1. Does the paper show a clear tie-in to the assigned article? (10 points)

          2. Does the paper present a thoughtful reaction or response to the article, rather than a summary? (10 points)

          3. Is the paper clearly written? (5 points)

          You must write a 650 words (body of text), double-spaced reaction paper demonstrating that you read the assigned article, and includes a thoughtful reaction to the material presented in the article. Points will be deducted when papers are deficient in any of these areas. I will deduct 10 points if your paper is between 620 and 649 words, and I will not give credit for papers under 620 words. Papers not turned in by the deadline will not receive credit.

          Please remember that your reaction paper should not be a summary, but rather a thoughtful discussion of some aspect of the article. Possible approaches to reaction papers include:

          1. A discussion of why you feel the topic is important and worthy of study (or not)

          2. An application of the study or results to your own experiences

        • Belly_Beanis [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          JFC she just saw the word “gender” and immediately decided this article was about putting puberty blockers in the water fountains.

          No, you Evangelical fuck. This is an article about girls being bullied for liking sports and camping and boys being bullied for not liking trucks and cigars.