Filtering by
- All Subjects: Arizona
- Creators: School of Politics and Global Studies
- Creators: Division of Teacher Preparation
- Creators: Department of English
- Member of: Theses and Dissertations
Families of students with disabilities and those who are culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD), are looking for better educational opportunities. Charter schools offer promise as they were designed to promote student learning with limited control from the state. Charter schools though, have been criticized for relying on exclusionary discipline policies that affect CLD students and students with disabilities disproportionately. This study was designed to understand how Arizona charter schools use exclusionary discipline practices, with a focus on students with disabilities and CLD students. Two participants, a fourth grade and fifth grade teacher from a Phoenix metropolis charter school completed surveys and interviews where they answered questions about their classroom and their school’s discipline policies. Teachers were asked how they have adapted and administered classroom discipline policies and to what extent have positive behavioral strategies been implemented in an online setting due to the COVID-19 pandemic when schools transitioned to virtual learning. The results showed that in a virtual setting, teachers retained the practice of removing students from the “classroom”, expectations had to be modified to meet the needs of the new environment, and the school counselor served in conflicting roles. The findings suggested that charter schools and teachers may be transferring and adapting their reliance on exclusionary discipline practices even for an online setting with classrooms that have students with disabilities and those who are CLD.
The Arizona Global Development Network (AGDN) is a group of diverse nonprofit organizations within the state. This network is a platform for member organizations to collaborate and exchange ideas on a wide range of topics regarding international development. Announced in 2016, the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) consists of 17 goals determined by the United Nations to address complex issues regarding human health, inequality and the environment around the globe. This self-designed code categorization study and semi-structured qualitative interviews aimed to explore Arizona’s international impacts and its alignment to the SDGs. First, the study completed a comprehensive observation of the information presented on these organizations’ websites. Second, interviews were conducted with representatives from each organization. The findings of this study provide an in-depth understanding of the network’s contributions to the wider, international community.
This podcast highlights the voices of organizers and activists across the nation. Representatives from various organizations and individual activists provide their experiences in working within reproductive health activist spaces. By listening to their stories and expertise, the hope is for listeners to center Reproductive Justice as a point of view. The goal is to encourage the audience to join an organization, support their local organizations, or at the very least, learn about resources provided to them by local and national organizations.
The text of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) states that “equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” The amendment was authored by Alice Paul and was first introduced into Congress in 1923. The ERA did not make much progress until 1970, when Representative Martha Griffiths from Michigan filed a discharge petition demanding that the ERA move out of the judiciary committee to be heard by the full United States House of Representatives. The House passed it and it went on to the Senate, where it was approved and sent to the states for ratification. By 1977, 35 states had voted to ratify the ERA, but it did not reach the 38 states-threshold required for ratification before the 1982 deadline set by Congress. More recently, Nevada ratified the ERA in March 2017, and Illinois followed suit in May 2018. On January 27th, 2020, Virginia finalized its ratification, making it the 38th state to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment.
Supporters of the ERA argue that we have reached the required goal of approval by 38 states. However, opponents may have at least two legal arguments to challenge this claim by ERA advocates. First, the deadline to ratify was 1982. Second, five states have voted to rescind their ratification since their initial approval. These political and legal challenges must be addressed and resolved before the ERA can be considered part of the United States Constitution. Nevertheless, ERA advocates continue to pursue certification. There are complicated questions to untangle here, to be sure, but by listening to a variety of perspectives and critically examining the historical and legal context, it may be possible to find some answers. Indeed, Arizona, which has yet to ratify the ERA, could play a vital role in the on-going fight for the ERA.