Demographic Variables

In the intricate landscape of school psychology, demographic variables, notably race, ethnicity, class, socioeconomic status, and gender, play a pivotal role in shaping students’ academic, social, and emotional experiences. These variables not only influence individual student trajectories but also intersect in multifaceted ways, demanding a nuanced understanding from educators and psychologists alike. This article delves into the historical context and contemporary significance of these demographic variables, examining their intertwined effects on student outcomes and their implications for assessment and intervention strategies. Through a comprehensive exploration, we underscore the importance of a culturally competent, inclusive, and holistic approach in school psychology, ensuring that every student’s unique background is both recognized and supported.


The field of school psychology, steeped in a history of addressing academic, behavioral, and socioemotional challenges, has evolved over the years to recognize the profound impact of demographic variables on students’ experiences in educational settings. These variables, including race, ethnicity, class, socioeconomic status, and gender, are not just background descriptors. Instead, they’re instrumental in shaping the educational trajectory, psychological well-being, and overall experience of students (Sue & Sue, 2016).

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% OFF with 24START discount code

Understanding the significance of these demographic factors is paramount as the global classroom becomes increasingly diverse. Contemporary educational institutions house a microcosm of the broader society, reflecting its complexities, disparities, and intersections. As such, it is no longer feasible to adopt a one-size-fits-all approach in school psychology. Addressing the unique challenges and leveraging the specific strengths that come with each demographic variable is essential for equitable and effective educational outcomes (Banks, 2016).

However, the recognition of the importance of demographic variables is not a novel concept. Historically, pioneers in education and psychology underscored the influence of socio-cultural contexts in shaping cognitive and behavioral patterns. Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory, for instance, postulated that cognitive functions are products of social interactions and cultural tools, highlighting the significance of cultural and social contexts in cognitive development (Vygotsky, 1978).

Yet, there remains a gap in the consistent and comprehensive application of this understanding in school psychology practices. While strides have been made, the nuances of race, class, socioeconomic status, and gender dynamics continue to demand a more refined and focused approach, one that is cognizant of historical oppressions, systemic challenges, and the immense potential for positive change when these variables are adequately addressed.

In the sections that follow, this article will unpack each of these demographic variables, delving into their historical treatment, contemporary relevance, and their intricate interplay, all in the context of school psychology.

Historical Context

Understanding the nuances of demographic variables in school psychology requires an exploration into their historical context. Each of these variables – race, ethnicity, class, socioeconomic status, and gender – has undergone various shifts in significance, interpretation, and impact over time, reflecting broader societal transformations and evolving academic discourse.

Race and Ethnicity in Schools

Historically, issues of race and ethnicity have been front and center in the realm of education. The landmark Brown v. Board of Education ruling in 1954 signaled an official end to racial segregation in U.S. schools, but the deep-seated impacts of racial discrimination persisted (Kluger, 1976). Although the judgment aimed to provide equal educational opportunities, the socio-psychological repercussions of segregation continued to affect the quality of education and well-being of many students of color. The legacy of racial and ethnic discrimination translated into school environments where students from diverse backgrounds often faced barriers, including reduced access to resources, stereotyping, and underestimation of their academic capabilities (Noguera, 2003).

Class and Socioeconomic Status

Class and socioeconomic status have always been determinants of educational access and quality. Historically, students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds faced systemic obstacles in obtaining quality education. The educational funding model, which largely depends on local property taxes in many countries, perpetuated these disparities, resulting in schools in affluent areas receiving more funding and resources compared to those in economically disadvantaged regions (Darling-Hammond, 2001). As a consequence, the cycle of poverty and limited educational opportunities became self-perpetuating for many families.

Gender Dynamics in Education

The journey of gender in school settings reflects a series of transformations, from the establishment of co-education systems to recognizing and addressing gender biases in curricula and teaching methodologies. Historically, schools, curricula, and pedagogical practices were entrenched in gendered norms. While girls were often steered towards ‘softer’ subjects and domestic roles, boys were encouraged to pursue disciplines like mathematics, science, and technology (Sadker & Zittleman, 2009). Over time, feminist movements and academic discourse have highlighted and worked towards rectifying these entrenched biases. Yet, disparities persist in areas like STEM education and are continually addressed in modern educational psychology research and practice (Wang & Degol, 2017).

In essence, the history of demographic variables in education reflects a broader societal journey, characterized by struggles, advancements, and ongoing challenges. School psychologists, situated at this intersection, have a pivotal role in navigating, understanding, and addressing these historical influences in contemporary educational settings.

Race and Ethnicity in School Settings

Race and ethnicity, as multifaceted constructs, play a significant role in shaping the experiences of students within educational systems around the world. These constructs interact with the educational environment in complex ways, influencing not only the academic outcomes but also the psychosocial well-being of students.

Understanding Race and Ethnicity

At their core, race and ethnicity pertain to the shared cultural, linguistic, and genealogical bonds among groups of people. However, over time, societal constructs have often misappropriated these categories, assigning unwarranted stereotypes and biases (Helms, Jernigan, & Mascher, 2005). It is imperative to distinguish between the genuine cultural attributes of racial and ethnic groups and the negative stereotypes that may be wrongly associated with them.

Impact on Academic Outcomes

Research has consistently shown that students from racial and ethnic minority backgrounds, especially in predominantly White institutions, often face challenges that their peers may not. These challenges include dealing with microaggressions, stereotype threats, and implicit biases from educators and peers, which can adversely affect their academic performance and aspirations (Steele, 1997). For example, the phenomenon of stereotype threat, wherein individuals underperform due to the anxiety of confirming negative stereotypes about their racial or ethnic group, can hinder the academic achievement of minority students.

The Socio-cultural Context

Students from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds bring with them a wealth of cultural experiences, values, and perspectives. While this diversity should be celebrated and leveraged as a strength, schools often lack the cultural competence to effectively engage with these students, sometimes leading to feelings of alienation and miscommunication (Gay, 2002). Culturally responsive teaching practices are essential in bridging this gap and ensuring that students from all backgrounds feel valued and understood.

Addressing Disparities

School psychologists have a pivotal role in advocating for and implementing interventions that address racial and ethnic disparities. This includes promoting anti-racist education, enhancing cultural competence among educators, and ensuring that curricula reflect the diverse histories and contributions of all racial and ethnic groups. Initiatives like multicultural education not only promote inclusivity but also prepare students for an increasingly globalized world (Banks, 2004).

In sum, addressing race and ethnicity in school settings requires a multifaceted approach, understanding the historical contexts, challenging biases and stereotypes, and cultivating an environment that acknowledges and celebrates diversity. Such endeavors not only benefit students from minority backgrounds but enrich the entire educational ecosystem, fostering understanding and collaboration among all students.

Class and Socioeconomic Status (SES) in School Settings

Socioeconomic status (SES) and class structure have profound implications on a student’s educational experience, outcomes, and the opportunities they encounter in the school setting. These elements, derived from a combination of income, education, and occupation, can significantly influence a student’s academic trajectory and overall well-being.

Defining SES and Class

Socioeconomic status is a complex interplay of economic, social, and work-related factors, serving as an indicator of an individual’s or family’s economic and social position relative to others (Bradley & Corwyn, 2002). Class, while closely related to SES, involves more nuanced cultural, social, and economic capital that defines a person’s status in society. Both play a pivotal role in shaping students’ experiences in schools.

Impact on Educational Outcomes

Multiple studies have illuminated the achievement gap associated with SES. Students from lower SES backgrounds frequently face challenges such as limited access to educational resources, less exposure to enriching extracurricular activities, and increased levels of stress due to economic constraints (Sirin, 2005). Such disparities can impact their academic performance, cognitive development, and social skills, placing them at a disadvantage compared to their higher SES peers.

Institutional Barriers

Schools in lower SES neighborhoods often grapple with larger class sizes, fewer qualified teachers, outdated resources, and inadequate facilities (Evans, 2004). Additionally, these schools may confront higher rates of student turnover, behavior issues, and truancy, further complicating the educational environment.

Interventions and Support

Recognizing the barriers students from lower SES backgrounds face, many educational initiatives aim to bridge the gap. Programs like free or reduced-price lunch, after-school enrichment activities, and tutoring can provide some respite. Moreover, school psychologists play an integral role in offering counseling and resources tailored to the unique challenges faced by these students, fostering resilience and aiding in their academic and emotional development (Amatea, Smith-Adcock, & Villares, 2006).

The Power of Resilience

Despite the myriad challenges, many students from lower SES backgrounds showcase commendable resilience, often outperforming expectations. Their determination, coupled with support from educators, peers, and families, underscores the potential for success irrespective of socioeconomic barriers.

In conclusion, understanding and addressing the complexities of class and SES within school settings is paramount for creating equitable educational environments. By acknowledging these disparities and implementing targeted interventions, educators and school psychologists can ensure that all students, regardless of their socioeconomic background, receive the support they need to thrive.

Gender Dynamics in School Settings

Gender, as a salient demographic variable, profoundly impacts students’ experiences within the educational landscape. From early academic achievements to social interactions, career aspirations, and self-perceptions, the construct of gender filters the school experiences of many students. An understanding of the intricate web of gender dynamics can provide educators and school psychologists with valuable insights, guiding more inclusive and supportive school environments.

Defining Gender

Historically, the terms ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ were used interchangeably. However, contemporary understandings emphasize the distinction. While ‘sex’ typically pertains to biological attributes, ‘gender’ encompasses a spectrum of identities, roles, expectations, and behaviors society attributes to individuals (Butler, 1990). Gender thus becomes a social construct, evolving and varying across cultures and time periods.

Academic Achievements and Gender

Gender stereotypes, often rooted in societal beliefs, can influence perceptions about academic capabilities. For instance, pervasive beliefs suggesting males excel in mathematical and scientific domains while females excel in verbal skills can shape students’ self-efficacy and performance in these subjects (Tiedemann, 2000). Such stereotypes, if left unchallenged, can perpetuate academic disparities, guiding students toward or away from specific fields of study based on gender.

Social Interactions and Gender Norms

Gender norms play a pivotal role in shaping students’ social interactions within schools. Peer groups may reinforce gendered behaviors, rewarding conformity while punishing divergence. This can impact students’ social development, self-expression, and well-being, especially for those who don’t align with traditional gender roles or those who identify as transgender or non-binary (Kosciw, Greytak, & Diaz, 2009).

Educator Bias and Expectations

Educators, though well-intentioned, might harbor implicit biases regarding gender. These biases can influence their interactions, feedback, and discipline, inadvertently fostering a gendered learning environment (Jones & Dindia, 2004). Training and professional development addressing these biases can make a significant difference in creating gender-neutral classrooms.

Empowerment through Gender-Inclusive Education

Schools embracing gender-inclusive curricula and pedagogies not only support all students irrespective of their gender identity but also challenge harmful stereotypes and biases. Such efforts foster critical thinking, empathy, and respect for diversity, equipping students with the skills to challenge and reshape societal norms (Hill & Flom, 2007).

To conclude, gender dynamics, deeply embedded in societal structures, invariably seep into school settings. Addressing them requires a multifaceted approach encompassing policy changes, curricular revisions, and continuous reflection. By actively working toward gender-equitable schools, educators and school psychologists can ensure all students, irrespective of their gender identity, find a supportive and nurturing educational environment.

Interactions Between Demographic Variables

Demographic variables such as race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and gender don’t exist in silos but often intersect and interact in ways that significantly influence students’ experiences within educational settings. These interactions can compound the challenges faced by individuals who identify with multiple marginalized groups, amplifying disparities and biases. Understanding these intersections is crucial for school psychologists and educators, as they provide a more nuanced view of students’ lived experiences, allowing for tailored interventions and supports.

Intersectionality: A Theoretical Framework

Coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw (1989), intersectionality is a concept that underscores the interconnected nature of social categorizations, emphasizing that they cannot be studied in isolation from one another. It suggests that unique combinations of these categorizations lead to specific experiences of discrimination or privilege. For instance, the experience of a Black woman in educational settings cannot merely be understood by examining gender and race independently; their intersections create distinct challenges.

Socioeconomic Status and Race

Socioeconomic status and race often interact in intricate ways, especially within educational contexts. Schools in economically disadvantaged areas, which predominantly serve students of color, might face systemic challenges such as limited resources, outdated materials, or overcrowded classrooms (Reardon, 2013). This intersection can perpetuate educational disparities, with students in these settings receiving suboptimal learning experiences.

Gender, Race, and Classroom Dynamics

Students who identify with multiple marginalized groups often navigate more complex classroom dynamics. A Latina girl might not only face gender-based stereotypes but may also grapple with racial biases, which can affect her academic self-concept and engagement (Vélez, Saenz, & Juarbe, 2008). Similarly, Asian boys might face the dual pressure of the “model minority” stereotype coupled with gendered expectations around academic achievement.

Gender, Socioeconomic Status, and Career Aspirations

Gendered expectations around suitable career paths can be compounded by socioeconomic factors. For instance, boys from lower socioeconomic backgrounds might feel pressured to pursue immediate employment post-schooling, forgoing higher education, due to financial constraints or family expectations (Sirin, Diemer, & Jackson, 2015). Conversely, girls from similar backgrounds might be directed towards traditionally ‘female-dominated’ professions which might be less remunerative.

In sum, demographic variables intricately interplay, sculpting distinct educational pathways and experiences for students. Recognizing and addressing these intersections is pivotal for school psychologists and educators. Only by acknowledging the multifaceted nature of these challenges can schools begin to dismantle barriers and create truly inclusive educational environments.

Implications for Assessment and Intervention

The intertwining of demographic variables, such as race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and gender, poses both challenges and opportunities for school psychologists in assessment and intervention processes. An appreciation of how these variables interact and influence students’ experiences ensures a more holistic and culturally responsive approach to assessment and intervention, fostering improved educational outcomes.

Culturally Responsive Assessment

Traditional psychological assessments might not always reflect the experiences and backgrounds of diverse student populations. Thus, there’s a pressing need for culturally sensitive tools that provide accurate results across different demographic groups (Sue, 1999). For instance, standardized tests that don’t consider linguistic differences or cultural nuances might inadvertently disadvantage students from diverse backgrounds.

Intersectional Case Conceptualization

When developing intervention plans, understanding the intersections of various demographic variables can lead to more effective outcomes. For instance, a Black girl from a low socioeconomic background might face unique challenges at school. An intervention that doesn’t consider the combined effects of race, gender, and socioeconomic status might not be effective (Crenshaw, 1989). School psychologists should, therefore, aim to understand the entirety of a student’s lived experience.

Tailored Interventions

Interventions need to reflect the nuances of students’ identities. For example, career counseling for Latina girls should consider both gender and ethnic stereotypes that might influence their self-perception and career choices (González, Stein, Kiang, & Cupito, 2014). Additionally, mentoring programs can benefit students who might feel isolated because of their intersecting identities, offering them role models who’ve faced similar challenges.

Staff Training and Professional Development

It’s vital for educational institutions to ensure that their staff are well-equipped to handle the challenges posed by diverse student populations. Training programs that focus on cultural competence, sensitivity, and the implications of intersectionality can significantly improve the quality of educational experiences for all students (Ratts, Singh, Nassar-McMillan, Butler, & McCullough, 2015).

In conclusion, the intricate interplay of demographic variables has profound implications for how school psychologists approach assessment and intervention. By tailoring approaches to consider these intersections, there’s a greater likelihood of providing meaningful and effective support for all students, especially those who might be at the crossroads of multiple marginalized identities.

Contemporary Challenges and Critiques

In the evolving landscape of school psychology, an ongoing reflection on practices related to demographic variables is essential. As the world becomes more interconnected and schools more diverse, understanding the nuances associated with race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and gender becomes ever more pivotal. Contemporary challenges and critiques emerge from these intersections, pointing towards areas of growth, understanding, and potential transformation.

Over-generalization and Stereotyping

One of the significant pitfalls in addressing demographic variables in school settings is the risk of over-generalizing or reinforcing stereotypes. For instance, while it’s essential to recognize patterns or trends within certain racial or ethnic groups, assuming that all members of that group share the same experiences or challenges can be counterproductive and harmful (Gay, 2002). Such assumptions can inadvertently pigeonhole students, limiting their potential and stifling individual expression.

Limited Availability of Culturally Sensitive Tools

Despite advances, there remains a dearth of culturally sensitive tools and resources tailored to diverse student populations. Standardized tests, interventions, and curricula often remain grounded in a predominantly Western-centric perspective, which may not resonate with or effectively cater to students from diverse backgrounds (Lopez, Ehly, & Garcia-Vazquez, 2002).

Intersectional Blind Spots

While race, class, gender, and SES are critical factors, there are other intersecting identities (like sexual orientation, disability status, or immigration status) that also play crucial roles in students’ experiences. The challenge is ensuring a genuinely intersectional approach that doesn’t overlook or diminish these other facets of identity (Crenshaw, 1991).

The Deficit-Based Approach Critique

A recurrent critique in addressing demographic variables in education is the deficit-based perspective, wherein certain groups are often viewed concerning what they lack instead of their strengths. This approach can hinder the development of resilience and self-efficacy in students. Emphasizing strengths-based approaches that recognize the assets and resilience of diverse student populations is fundamental (Harry & Klinger, 2006).

In summary, while strides have been made in understanding and addressing the roles of demographic variables in school psychology, contemporary challenges and critiques underscore the need for continuous reflection, research, and adaptation. Addressing these challenges not only ensures more equitable educational outcomes but also fosters a more inclusive and understanding school environment.

The Way Forward: Best Practices and Future Directions

The intricate interplay of demographic variables in school psychology can be both a challenge and an opportunity. The last few decades have witnessed a growing acknowledgment of the need to make educational practices more inclusive and culturally sensitive. The emphasis now is not merely on recognizing diversity but celebrating and leveraging it to foster more equitable and enriching educational experiences for all students. As school psychology stands at the cusp of these transformative shifts, several best practices and future directions merit attention.

Culturally Responsive Interventions

A one-size-fits-all approach in interventions is increasingly being seen as inadequate. Instead, the focus is on designing interventions that are culturally responsive, taking into account the unique cultural, racial, and socio-economic contexts of the students involved (Gay, 2010). Such interventions not only tend to be more effective but also instill a greater sense of belonging among students.

Enhanced Training for School Psychologists

It’s imperative that school psychologists receive continuous training to be attuned to the nuances of demographic variables. This includes training in recognizing their biases, understanding intersectionality, and developing skills to engage with diverse student populations empathetically (Newell, Nastasi, Hatzichristou, Jones, Schanding & Yetter, 2010).

Collaboration with Communities

The school doesn’t operate in isolation from its surrounding community. Engaging collaboratively with local communities—especially those representing marginalized demographic groups—can offer invaluable insights into creating more inclusive educational environments (Sue & Sue, 2012).

Embracing Technology

The digital age offers myriad tools that can be harnessed to address demographic challenges in education. From culturally diverse educational apps to online platforms that offer tailored interventions based on individual demographic profiles, technology can be a game-changer in making education more inclusive (Chu & Garcia, 2014).

Research & Policy Advocacy

Continuous research is crucial to keep updating our understanding of how demographic variables influence educational outcomes. Moreover, school psychologists, backed by robust research, can play a pivotal role in advocating for policies that make education more inclusive at local, state, and national levels (Shriberg, Song, Miranda, & Radliff, 2019).

In essence, while the journey towards making school psychology more attuned to demographic variables is ongoing, the path ahead is promising. With concerted efforts, collaboration, and a genuine commitment to inclusivity, the future of school psychology can indeed be brighter and more equitable.


Demographic variables, including race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, gender, and class, have long shaped the landscape of school psychology. Their impact is seen not just in the varied outcomes of students from different backgrounds, but also in the very fabric of educational policies, practices, and daily interactions in schools. The importance of understanding and addressing these variables cannot be overstated, especially in an increasingly diverse and interconnected global society.

The evolution of school psychology over the past few decades, as depicted by this exploration, reflects an increasingly nuanced understanding of the interplay between demographic factors and educational outcomes (Stewart & Vandiver, 2007). Far from being static or deterministic, demographic variables often intersect and interact in complex ways, producing a tapestry of experiences and outcomes that school psychologists must navigate. These complexities challenge the profession to be more reflexive, critical, and proactive.

The integration of cultural and demographic nuances into interventions, assessments, and everyday practices has become a hallmark of contemporary school psychology (D’Andrea & Daniels, 2001). However, the journey is far from over. As demographics continue to shift and societies grow more complex, so too will the challenges and opportunities presented to educators and school psychologists. The continual advancement of research, technology, and training in this domain holds promise for an education system that recognizes and celebrates the rich tapestry of its students.

It is crucial, as Noltemeyer and Proctor (2016) highlight, for school psychologists and educators to embrace a perspective that is at once global and local. The shared and unique challenges of students from various demographic backgrounds call for interventions that are universally effective yet locally relevant. In this balancing act lies the future of an inclusive, equitable, and responsive educational system.

In closing, as we stand on the threshold of a new era in education, the commitment to understanding and addressing demographic variables in school psychology is not just a professional obligation—it’s a moral imperative. With collaboration, innovation, and dedication, the field of school psychology can indeed rise to the occasion, ensuring that every student, irrespective of their background, has the opportunity to thrive.


  1. Amatea, E. S., Smith-Adcock, S., & Villares, E. (2006). From family deficit to family strength: Viewing families’ contributions to children’s learning from a family resilience perspective. Professional School Counseling, 9(3), 177-189.
  2. Banks, J. A. (2004). Teaching for social justice, diversity, and citizenship in a global world. The Educational Forum, 68(4), 296-305.
  3. Banks, J. A. (2016). Cultural diversity and education: Foundations, curriculum, and teaching. Routledge.
  4. Bradley, R. H., & Corwyn, R. F. (2002). Socioeconomic status and child development. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 371-399.
  5. Butler, J. (1990). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.
  6. Chu, S. Y., & Garcia, S. B. (2014). Culturally responsive practices in school psychology: A national survey of demographic characteristics, perspectives, and practices among diverse school psychologists. School Psychology Forum, 8(4), 37-52.
  7. Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics. The University of Chicago Legal Forum, 140, 139-167.
  8. Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241-1299.
  9. D’Andrea, M., & Daniels, J. (2001). Respectful counseling: An integrative multidimensional model for counselors. In J.G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp. 417-434). Sage.
  10. Darling-Hammond, L. (2001). The challenge of staffing our schools. Educational Leadership, 58(8), 12-17.
  11. Evans, G. W. (2004). The environment of childhood poverty. American Psychologist, 59(2), 77-92.
  12. Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of teacher education, 53(2), 106-116.
  13. Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers College Press.
  14. González, L. M., Stein, G. L., Kiang, L., & Cupito, A. M. (2014). The impact of discrimination and support on developmental competencies in Latino adolescents. Journal of Latina/o Psychology, 2(2), 79.
  15. Harry, B., & Klinger, J. (2006). Why are so many minority students in special education? Understanding race & disability in schools. NYU Press.
  16. Helms, J. E., Jernigan, M., & Mascher, J. (2005). The meaning of race in psychology and how to change it: A methodological perspective. American Psychologist, 60(1), 27-36.
  17. Hill, L., & Flom, R. (2007). 18- and 24-month-olds’ discrimination of gender-consistent and inconsistent activities. Infant Behavior and Development, 30(1), 168-173.
  18. Jones, E. E., & Dindia, K. (2004). A meta-analytic perspective on sex equity in the classroom. Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 443-471.
  19. Kosciw, J. G., Greytak, E. A., & Diaz, E. M. (2009). Who, what, where, when, and why: Demographic and ecological factors contributing to hostile school climate for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38(7), 976-988.
  20. Kluger, R. (1976). Simple justice: The history of Brown v. Board of Education and Black America’s struggle for equality. Vintage.
  21. Lopez, E. C., Ehly, S., & Garcia-Vazquez, E. (2002). Acculturation, social support, and academic achievement of Mexican and Mexican American high school students: An exploratory study. Psychology in the Schools, 39(3), 245-257.
  22. Newell, M. L., Nastasi, B. K., Hatzichristou, C., Jones, J. M., Schanding, G. T., & Yetter, G. (2010). Evidence on multicultural training in school psychology: Recommendations for future directions. School Psychology Quarterly, 25(4), 249.
  23. Noguera, P. A. (2003). City schools and the American dream: Reclaiming the promise of public education. Teachers College Press.
  24. Noltemeyer, A. L., & Proctor, S. L. (2016). Relationships between school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports and academic, attendance, and behavior outcomes in high schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18(1), 41-51.
  25. Ratts, M. J., Singh, A. A., Nassar-McMillan, S., Butler, S. K., & McCullough, J. R. (2015). Multicultural and social justice counseling competencies. The Counseling Psychologist, 44(1), 105-131.
  26. Reardon, S. F. (2013). The widening income achievement gap. Educational Leadership, 70(8), 10-16.
  27. Sadker, D., & Zittleman, K. R. (2009). Still failing at fairness: How gender bias cheats girls and boys in school and what we can do about it. Simon and Schuster.
  28. Shriberg, D., Song, S. Y., Miranda, A. H., & Radliff, K. M. (2019). Social justice and school psychology: A systematic review of the literature, implications for practice, and future research directions. Psychology in the Schools, 56(10), 1658-1677.
  29. Sirin, S. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417-453.
  30. Sirin, S. R., Diemer, M. A., & Jackson, L. R. (2015). Social class and educational inequality: The impact of parents and schools. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  31. Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52(6), 613-629.
  32. Stewart, D. L., & Vandiver, B. J. (2007). The role of context in shaping the school experiences and psychological well-being of African American students: Need for a more nuanced perspective. Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 121-131.
  33. Sue, D. W. (1999). Multicultural counseling and therapy (MCT). Handbook of multicultural counseling, 1, 45-62.
  34. Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (2012). Counseling the culturally diverse: Theory and practice. John Wiley & Sons.
  35. Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (2016). Counseling the culturally diverse: Theory and practice (7th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
  36. Tiedemann, J. (2000). Parents’ gender stereotypes and teachers’ beliefs as predictors of children’s concept of their mathematical ability in elementary school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 144-151.
  37. Vélez, W., Saenz, R., & Juarbe, D. R. (2008). Females and males of a Latino ethnic subgroup: Differences in college access and success. In The Majority in the Minority (pp. 141-160). Routledge.
  38. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  39. Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. L. (2017). Gender gap in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM): Current knowledge, implications for practice, policy, and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 29(1), 119-140.