10.4 Social Contexts in Adolescence

Friendships

A friendship is an intimate, emotionally close relationship between two individuals (Brown & Larson, 2009). Friendships form based on similar interests such as music or sports and may dissipate if those interests change over time. However, as adolescence progresses, and as individuals actively explore and form their identity, friendships tend to become more stable and enduring. Intimacy is a key feature of friendship, and in a psychological sense it means making ourself vulnerable to another.

Especially in early and midadolescence, friendships can be exclusive and intense, relying on trust and mutual support. Later in adolescence, this intensity is often transferred to a romantic relationship (Costello et al., 2023; Wesche et al., 2023). Research in multiple countries has consistently found that males tend to share personal information with a single best friend, whereas females tend to disclose evenly among their close friends (Ko et al., 2015; Kitts & Leal, 2021). However, it does vary. For example, male students at a Japanese university reported sharing more personal information with close friends than female students did (Fankhauser, 2018). This was true overall and for specific topics. The study used two different measures of self-disclosure, both showing similar results, especially in cross-gender friendships. It also found that feeling close to a friend and trusting the friendship's stability were linked to more self-disclosure (Fankhauser, 2018). These findings highlight the role friendships serve: adolescents switch some of their needs for social and emotional support from their parents to close friends, and in turn these needs for intimacy are also brought into romantic relationships later on.

Cliques

A close group of three to a dozen or so friends is called a clique (Brown & Larson, 2009). Cliques serve many functions for developing adolescents. First, they break the larger social environment into one of more manageable size and offer a context in which much socialization (“hanging out”) occurs, both within and outside the school setting. They also provide a source of emotional support for members, as well as a sense of belonging and encouragement (McFarland et al., 2014). For example, a group of close-knit friends in a clique who share similar interests, such as skateboarding or a science club, can be there to listen and offer advice during challenging times. When a teen is stressed about an upcoming exam, their clique might organize a study session to help all members prepare, boosting both academic performance and emotional well-being. And they can offer encouragement and celebrate each other's successes, such as cheering on a member at a competition or congratulating them on a good achievement in the classroom.

An analysis of adolescents from about 170 secondary school classrooms asked students to identify the cliques in their school and nominate peers as members of each (Pattisellano et al., 2015). First, the study found the average size of a clique was just shy of six members (5.72, to be exact). Second, researchers discovered that some cliques have a status hierarchy, while others are more equality driven, or egalitarian (Pattisellano et al., 2015). Peer status matters in the larger social context of the adolescent world because both aggression and prosocial (helping) behavior are related to social standing. Thus, being a member of a higher-status clique could offer protection against aggression from others, while being a member of a low-status clique could be disadvantageous.

The term relational aggression refers to the practice of including or excluding others or otherwise threatening a sense of belonging such as by spreading gossip. It was associated more with egalitarian cliques. This makes sense, though; one purpose of a social hierarchy is to spell out exactly where everyone stands in relation to one another. In an egalitarian group this is not as easy to discern, and when members are striving for status, an increase in aggression can result. More prosocial behavior toward other members was found within hierarchical groups, as was increased aggression toward other cliques (Kwon & Lease, 2007, Zhao & Li, 2022). This result shows both the function and the power of cliques—to support those within the group, and to advocate for social standing against other groups.

Crowds

A larger social grouping in the social milieu of adolescents is called a crowd, and it can have many dozens of members, not all of whom are necessarily friends or even know each other. Crowds can be made up of different cliques and often form around various activities, interests, aspects of youth culture (such as anime), or members’ personality characteristics, social status, or reputation (Brown & Larson, 2009) (Figure 10.10). Common crowd names in U.S. high schools include “populars,” “jocks,” “brains,” and “normals” (Crabbe, et al., 2019). The names of crowds may change, but the presence of these common themes in crowds has been around for quite some time.

Figure 10.10 (a) Friends, (b) cliques, and (c) crowds are important groups in teen development. (credit a: modification of work “Friends working on a computer” by “antoinedigital”/nappy, Public Domain; credit b: modification of work “Group of friends hanging out” by “Stacey_jayyy”/nappy, Public Domain; credit c: modification of work “Day 3 - The One Young World Summit 2014” by One Young World/Flickr, Public Domain)

How do individuals become part of a crowd during adolescence? Crowds come together through both selection (people with similar values, interests, and experiences find each other) and socialization (members reinforce shared attitudes and behaviors to uphold their identity and sense of belonging). Research suggests that academic orientation, athleticism, and physical appearance are among the primary characteristics through which teens sort themselves from an early age onward (Brown & Larson, 2009), and that ethnic and racial group membership are not (Brown, et al., 2008). One way to think of crowds and cliques is that crowds exist as part of the large social backdrop of adolescence, while actual peer relationships occur within and between cliques and friendships.

For most adolescents, the way their peers view them is very important, and not being accepted can lead to problems like relational aggression and poor academic performance (Lorijn et al., 2022). Girls are especially likely to worry about conflicts and being rejected by their peers (Chesney-Lind & Irwin, 2008). Girls who feel rejected often seek attention and form cliques to feel accepted (Hamilton, 2010). Popular students may act aggressively because they believe their high status protects them from negative consequences. Within these cliques, teens join the same activities and spend free time together, creating a strong social network. In contrast, less popular students interact less with their classmates and have fewer close friends. Overall, teen friendships help organize social interactions in the classroom, affecting teen mental health and behavior (Long et al., 2021; Casper et al., 2020).

Peer Social Risks

Teens who struggle to find a social group often face significant isolation and loneliness, which are linked to various negative outcomes including increased risk of depression, anxiety, and low self-esteem (Laursen & Hartl, 2013). Social isolation can also hinder academic performance and school engagement, since the peer support that can encourage and motivate the individual is lacking (Wentzel, 2005). Feelings of exclusion can also arise, and the absence of support increases the likelihood of engaging in harmful behaviors as a coping mechanism (Hawkley & Capitanio, 2015). For example, teenagers who feel isolated and lack positive social connections often seek acceptance in alternative groups, which can include gangs (Dmitrieva et al., 2014). Gangs offer a sense of community and identity, though through engagement in deviant behaviors. Addressing social isolation in teens and providing positive social support systems through parents, teachers, mentors, and community programs are critical to prevent gang involvement as well as promote overall well-being and teen mental health.

Attachment

Recall that our internal working models of relationships provide us with scripts, including what we can expect from a relationship and how others are likely to behave. With these models, adolescents bring their full relationship and attachment history into their first (and subsequent) romantic relationships.

According to Hazan & Shaver (1987), both the ability to enter romantic relationships and the quality of those relationships are also connected to an individual’s attachment history (4.4 Social Development in Infants and Toddlers). Individuals with a secure attachment history bring several assets to an adolescent romantic relationship. These include effective communication skills like listening and sharing, appropriate emotional expression, the ability to assert and negotiate needs and expectations, and the capacity to seek support from and provide it to a partner (Carroll et al., 2007; Halford, 2011) (Figure 10.11). Such individuals also show skill in approaching others, forming intimate connections, and benefiting from such connections. They exhibit greater warmth and understanding and use a more constructive approach to resolving disputes (Tan, et al., 2016), which is essential because conflicts within a romantic relationship often arouse strong emotions.

Figure 10.11 Teens with a secure attachment history are often skilled at listening, sharing, and offering emotional support to others. (credit: modification of work “Hugging couple” by freestocks.org/Flickr, Public Domain)

Adolescents who have developed insecure attachment styles, including anxious-preoccupied (termed “ambivalent” in childhood) and avoidant, bring different experiences, expectations, and skill sets to their first romantic relationships (Brar et al., 2023; Choi et al., 2022; Dinero et al., 2008; Stavropoulos et al., 2018). Those with an anxious-preoccupied attachment history are interested in forming romantic relationships and enter such relationships eagerly. However, because of the inconsistent support and confusing mix of disappointment and frustration in their previous relationships, they often lack the confidence that a romantic relationship will bring all the benefits they are hoping for. Instead, they may seek frequent reassurance from their partner about their commitment and support. Romantic partners in turn often experience this need for reassurance as clinginess and may try to distance themselves emotionally. Ironically, this reaction is exactly what the internal working model of someone with anxious-preoccupied attachment predicts. Any resulting distancing, rejection, or breakup reinforces that model.

Adolescents with an avoidant attachment history don’t expect much from a romantic relationship, are overly self-reliant, and approach close relationships with skepticism and worry. These expectations often color their experience of early romantic relationships: any instance of dissatisfaction leads them to withdraw, further reinforcing their internal working model (Stavropoulos, et al., 2018).

A central tenet of attachment theory, however, is that partnering with someone who has a secure attachment style can benefit individuals with an anxious-preoccupied or avoidant attachment history. For instance, research shows that teenagers who engage in positive peer relationships, receive mentoring, and experience supportive school environments can develop healthy attachments and show resilience despite early challenges with unhealthy attachment patterns (Grossmann et al., 2005). Thus, we see the potential for positive development and reworking of the insecurely attached individual’s internal working model within the context of romantic relationships.

Dating Violence and Unhealthy Relationships

Teen interpersonal health risks often stem from their socioemotional needs for dating and establishing romantic relationships with appropriate peers. Romantic relationships are crucial for socioemotional development because they help to develop intimacy skills and shape identity and autonomy (Connolly & McIsaac, 2009). However, they can also generate intense emotions and conflicts, sometimes with the potential for teen dating violence (TDV). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2024) defines dating violence as a variety of unsafe behaviors inflicted on a partner. Psychological dating violence includes manipulative actions aimed at indirectly harming the partner. Physical dating violence can range from pushing and slapping to more severe acts like beating, kicking, or strangling. Sexual TDV includes forced sexual activities, from unwanted touching to forced penetration. Stalking is a pattern of repeated, unwanted attention and contact by a current or former partner that causes fear or safety concerns for an individual or someone close to them (CDC, 2024).

Many adolescents report experiencing violence in their romantic relationships. Data from the 2011–2021 Youth Risk Behavior Surveys show significant rates of these experiences among U.S. high school students, with notable disparities affecting females, racial and ethnic minorities, and sexual minority youths (Basile, 2020). In 2021, 8.5 percent reported physical dating violence, 9.7 percent reported sexual dating violence, 11.0 percent reported sexual violence, 15 percent experienced bullying at school, and 15.9 percent faced electronic bullying (Clayton, 2023). A meta-analysis by Wincentak et al. (2017) found that 20 percent of teens aged thirteen to eighteen years have experienced physical dating violence, and 9 percent have experienced sexual dating violence. Given how common dating violence is, and the severity of its effects including psychological distress, suicidal thoughts, and post-traumatic symptoms (Exner-Cortens et al., 2013; Hébert et al., 2017), it is now seen as a serious public health problem. A recent study of late-stage adolescents' views on romantic relationships found that while teens can identify healthy and unhealthy relationship traits, some find it hard to see jealousy and possessiveness as negative behaviors, often mistaking them for signs of strong interest (Brar et al., 2023). Programs promoting healthy dating behaviors, clarifying unhealthy traits, teaching respectful conflict resolution, and encouraging intervention in abusive situations can benefit all teens (Foshee et al., 2014).

Teen dating violence, sexual violence, and bullying during adolescence are linked to health and behavioral issues in adulthood. Victimized teens may engage in risky behaviors like substance misuse or develop eating disorders as coping mechanisms (Batchelder et al., 2022). Studies also indicate that TDV is longitudinally associated with increasing high-risk behaviors, such as marijuana and alcohol use, and poor mental health outcomes (Piolanti et al., 2023). Trauma can also impair academic performance and social relationships, leading to isolation (Cava et al., 2020) and further emotional distress. Addressing these risks requires comprehensive sex and relationship education, preventative socioemotional health services, and accessible intervention support to ensure teens can establish and maintain healthy, respectful relationships. For instance, the reality of TDV should be included in school curricula focused on sex and relationship education. Schools must commit to fostering a violence-free social environment and encourage bystander intervention (Banyard et al., 2020).

Media Diet

What do we know about the media diet of teenagers today? The most relevant indicator is screen time, which includes time spent watching videos online, playing or watching others play video games, using tablets for creative purposes, using virtual reality devices, browsing the internet, using social media apps, and reading e-books. Average daily screentime for teenagers in 2021 was eight hours and thirty-nine minutes, an increase from six hours and forty minutes daily in 2015 (Rideout et al., 2022).

Research shows that 77 percent of teens watch online videos every day and spend an average of ninety minutes a day using social media apps such as Instagram and Snapchat. The Pew Research Center reports that 19 percent of teens use YouTube “almost constantly,” and 16 percent use TikTok with the same level of intensity (Vogels, 2022) (Figure 10.12). Teens from lower-income households report the highest screen use, averaging seven hours and thirty-two minutes per day.

Figure 10.12 The total screen time usage per day for entertainment purposes has significantly increased for both preteens and teens. (data source a: Pew Research Center; data source b: Common Sense Media; attribution: Copyright Rice University, OpenStax, under CC BY 4.0 license)

The COVID-19 pandemic of 2020–2023 markedly increased media use by teenagers. Contributing factors included societywide shutdowns of schools and other gathering places and social distancing protocols that made technology necessary for human interaction. Teenagers spent an average of more than eleven hours a day in front of screens during the pandemic, including for schooling; for more than 40 percent of them, this increase also meant more social media and video viewing (Hamilton et al., 2023; Marciano et al., 2022). Social media did let teens stay connected with one another during the pandemic, however, and its use then has been linked to lower stress, boredom, and loneliness among youth, in contrast to findings about social media use and adolescents’ psychological health post-pandemic (Marciano, et al., 2022).

There is a significant rise in anxiety, depression, and mental health issues among teenagers, which is linked to increased screen time and social media use. For example, the amount of media information about the pandemic itself increased teens’ feelings of anxiety. Researchers suggest that digital interactions contribute to a decline in face-to-face social skills and an increase in feelings of loneliness and inadequacy. They emphasize the need for reduced screen exposure to improve mental well-being in young people (Twenge, 2020; Haidt, 2024). When adolescents use their screen time as a replacement for social interactions, negative effects do emerge, such as a less positive body image, lower self-esteem, and an uptick in eating disorders (Ramsey, et al., 2023).

Psychological Effects

What do we know about the psychological effects of extensive media use? First, there are some positives. The primary purpose of all media is to communicate and entertain, facilitate interaction and engagement (especially over long distances), give exposure to new ideas and perspectives, and foster collaboration (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2016). Media sources also provide a way for isolated individuals to connect more easily with other people and resources, and an easier entry point to social interaction for those who may be shy or isolated. Some media are also extremely effective at advocating for certain positions or attitudes, so they can help spread positive and healthy information.

Psychologists, health professionals, and communications experts have also documented several physical health risks of media use. In a review of the literature, the American Academy of Pediatrics (2016) reports a fivefold increase in the chance of developing obesity among teens who watch more than five hours of media per day. One reason is an increase in snacking or passive eating during television viewing. Heavy media use can also increase sleep disturbances in teens (and adults): the blue cast to the light of screens interferes with the body’s melatonin levels, and adolescents have different sleep needs than children. These physical health risks can in turn increase psychological and socioemotional health risks.

In a systematic review of fifty studies from seventeen countries, researchers found that social media use is linked to body image concerns, eating disorders, and poor mental health among young individuals aged ten to twenty-four years. Social media exposure may lead to negative body image perceptions and contribute to the rising prevalence of eating disorders, emphasizing the potential global public health significance of this issue (Dane & Bhatia, 2023). Higher media use is predictive of a long list of other negative impacts including increased alcohol and tobacco use (Lewycka et al., 2018), earlier initiation of sexual behaviors (Smith et al., 2016), desensitization (or normalization) of certain negative content such as self-harming and disordered eating, increased risk of cyberbullying (as target or perpetrator), and sexting (Bozzola et al., 2023).

Sexting and Sexual Harassment

According to the CDC (2019), "sexual violence can occur in person, online, or via technology, as in the cases of posting or sharing sexual pictures of someone without their consent, or non-consensual sexting." Technology allows people to reach an audience virtually anywhere and at any time, and it is increasingly simple to involve someone by using images and/or videos. Teens report considerable pressure to sext (Abeele et al., 2014; Lunde & Joleby, 2023). Fifteen percent reported having sent a sext and 25 percent had received one (Giordano, et al., 2022). A recent study looked at how common abusive sexting is among Portuguese teens and the psychological traits of those involved, like emotional issues, signs of psychopathy, and past trauma (Barroso et al., 2021). Among twelve- to twenty-year-old participants, about 4.8 percent admitted to abusive sexting and 4.3 percent reported being victims. Abusive sexting was more frequent among males and those in midadolescence, and both perpetrators and victims had higher rates of emotional and behavioral problems, childhood abuse, and aggression (Barroso et al., 2021).

Abusive messages can easily be forwarded to large groups of recipients without the subject’s permission. The age of consent, which varies state to state and country to country, is the minimum age at which an individual can legally make decisions to engage in sexual behavior. In some U.S. states, it is a crime to merely receive a sext from someone under the age of consent, depending on the age difference between sender and recipient. According to the Cyberbullying Research Center, in twenty-seven of fifty U.S. states and the District of Columbia, the legal age of consent for sexual acts is sixteen years old and a sexting law is in place. In nine states the legal age for sexting is seventeen years old, and in eleven states, the age of consent is eighteen years old (CRC, 2022). Many teenagers believe it is acceptable to exchange sexts with someone they are dating or are sexually involved with, but this is not legally true.

Sending sexts can lead to serious social consequences if the images are shared or spread widely (Strasburger et al., 2019). When sexting occurs outside legal boundaries or includes coercion and pressure, it constitutes another form of sexual abuse and harassment, posing significant psychological risks for teens. Victims often experience anxiety, depression, and other mental health issues as a result. According to the Cyberbullying Research Center, approximately 12 percent of U.S. adolescents have been coerced into sending explicit images, highlighting the prevalence of this form of sexual victimization (Patchin & Hinduja, 2020).

Another form of sexual harassment is the use of deepfakes, digitally manipulated videos or images that create realistic but false representations of individuals. Sexually explicit deepfakes are of growing concern. Sharing them can be devastating to adolescents (Kristof, 2024). Victims can experience anxiety, depression, and harm to their personal and professional lives (Rousay, 2023). Protecting teens against sexual deepfakes requires a multifaceted approach, including educating them about the risks of sharing personal images online, promoting sufficient digital literacy to recognize and report deepfakes, and advocating for stronger legal protections and enforcement against their creation and distribution (Citron, 2019).

Best Practices for Healthy Media Use

How can we mitigate the risks associated with heavy media use? The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) (2016) recommends that pediatricians partner with parents and educators to communicate the effects of media, both positive and negative. Health-care professionals should also emphasize healthy activity levels (maximum of one hour of screen time per day) and adequate sleep for teens, recommend that children and teens not sleep with their electronic devices in their rooms, and advocate for media literacy programs in school curricula, youth organization programming, and family discussions.

The U.S. Surgeon General’s advisory emphasizes making policy and program changes at the government level, like advocating for media literacy curricula in schools, requiring strict data privacy protections by tech companies that create apps used by teens, and continuing to research and develop usage guidelines (United States Department of Health & Human Services, 2023). Families are urged to develop a family media plan that sets boundaries for technology use at home and to create “tech-free” zones and time periods, such as family meals. Parents should also model appropriate media use for their children.

While phones can be a major source of distraction due to games and social media, they also offer valuable resources for media consumption, such as audiobooks, music, educational apps, and news. By setting clear guidelines and discussing the importance of balance, parents can help their teens develop healthy habits (AAP, 2016). Encouraging responsible use means setting time limits, promoting tech-free family times, and discussing the potential risks and benefits of various apps and online activities (Rideout & Robb, 2018). Recreational apps and games can also promote relaxation and improve cognitive skills like problem-solving and hand-eye coordination.

One particular form of media deserves a special focus: music. Listening to music is one of the hallmark behaviors of adolescence, and music is a part of youth culture that helps to connect each cohort. Robert Sapolsky (1998) posited that our interest in new music wanes at around age thirty-five years, and that the music we listen to in our teenage years largely forms the basis for our lifelong musical preferences. One study found that listening to music was the most common strategy teens use for self-regulation (Saarikallio & Erkkila, 2007). Other reasons for playing music are for entertainment, sensation-seeking, relaxing, discharge of energy, diversion, and solace (Baltazar, 2019). Developing a set of musical preferences is another way adolescents can explore and develop their identities. It’s likely that teens (and adults) curate playlists in part so they can have music ready to help them cope with their changing emotional states (Cook et al., 2019). After a frustrating day at school, for example, a fifteen-year-old may listen to some heavy-metal music, nodding to the ferocious beats and discharging some of that negative energy, elevating her mood.

Outcomes

What kinds of outcomes in academic achievement does schooling produce? The high school graduation rate for the United States overall was 86 percent in the 2018–2019 school year (NCES, 2021). This number has increased consistently since it was first tracked at the national level in 2011. Group-level differences were observed, however. For Asian-American/Pacific Islander students, the rate is 93 percent, for White students 89 percent, for Hispanic students 82 percent, for Black students 80 percent, and for Native American students 74 percent.

The U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) produces The Nation’s Report Card, a semiannual snapshot of fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-grade achievement in mathematics and reading, among other subject areas (NCES, 2021). The most recently available data for twelfth grade are for 2019, one year prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. For mathematics, 60 percent of twelfth-grade students met or exceeded the basic competence level nationwide, while just 24 percent met or exceeded what the NCES calls a “proficient” level of achievement (Figure 10.13). This represented a slight decrease in achievement compared with each assessment dating back to 2009. Males and females achieved at roughly similar levels.

Figure 10.13 Twelfth grade math scores show some range in proficiency based on various sociodemographic factors including gender, race/ethnicity, English language proficiency, and parental education. Note for example, the increase in scores as parent education level increases. (attribution: Copyright Rice University, OpenStax, under CC BY 4.0 license)

There were significant mathematics achievement gaps between students from different ethnoracial groups, as well as for students from households with different parental levels of schooling, and also for students who were English-language learners. For example, students whose native language was not English showed the largest mathematics achievement gap compared to native English speakers. Finally, the greater the educational attainment of parents, the higher the mathematics achievement of their children: adolescent children of college-educated parents scored higher on average than children whose parents did not graduate from high school. Educational attainment is one of the main components of socioeconomic status, an indicator of the level of social and economic resources a person or family has at their disposal. To support students, it is imperative that governments provide access to high-quality early childhood education programs to help level the playing field for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Addressing disparities in disciplinary actions and providing culturally responsive curriculum and instruction can foster the academic success of marginalized and disadvantaged students. Finally, socioeconomically disadvantaged students often demonstrate remarkable resilience and perseverance and are highly motivated to succeed academically with the goal to improve their circumstances (Anyaka, 2017).

By twelfth grade, we see similar patterns emerging for reading achievement (Figure 10.14). The NCES reports slight declines in reading achievement levels between 2015 and 2019 for male students and for those whose parents had some education beyond high school (NCES, 2021). Otherwise, scores and achievement gaps between groups were stable for twelfth graders across that time period. Gaps include a difference in favor of students whose parents had graduated from college versus students from homes where the parents did not finish high school, and large achievement gaps between native English speakers and English language learners and between Asian and Black students.

Figure 10.14 Twelfth-grade reading scores show some range in proficiency based on various sociodemographic factors including gender, race/ethnicity, English language proficiency, and parental education. Note for example the difference in scores between those learning English and those already proficient in English. (attribution: Copyright Rice University, OpenStax, under CC BY 4.0 license)

Sociodemographic Factors in Achievement Disparities

When the COVID-19 pandemic began in March 2020, children in the United States experienced major disruptions in schooling, particularly in socially and economically vulnerable groups (Bansak & Starr, 2021; Bailey et al., 2021; Maldonado & DeWitte, 2022). Parents from families with low incomes were more likely to be essential workers exposed to the COVID-19 virus and less likely to have access to high-quality health care (Berube & Bateman, 2020). Additionally, these families were less likely than families with higher income to have reliable internet access and computers at home, which made it harder for children in these homes to participate in online education (Stelitano et al., 2020).

Children in families with low income are also more likely to join public schools that lack the resources needed to support teachers in delivering high-quality online instruction. Additionally, parents with low income are less able to provide extra instructional support through private tutoring and other enrichment activities (Lee et al., 2021). Research from China and Indonesia indicates that students in rural regions experienced more negative impacts after school closures during the pandemic compared to students in urban areas (e.g., Pasani et al., 2021).

Black teens are often aware of the racialized nature of achievement disparities. They are frequently reminded of these disparities in their schools as well as on social media (Hope et al., 2015). For example, a longitudinal study noted that adolescents’ structural attributions (i.e., awareness of systemic and institutional factors that contribute to disparities) for racial achievement gaps increased from grade 10 to grade 12 (Bañales et al., 2020). However, when Black students recognize that such factors are rooted in historical and ongoing patterns of discrimination and inequality within educational systems and broader society, it works as an adaptive mechanism for their psychological development. When perceiving the causes of achievement disparities as external rather than internal, they see that their ability level is not fixed, which can help students establish a growth mindset and improve academic outcomes.

Ability grouping, also known as tracking, is a practice in education where students are placed into different classes or groups based on their perceived academic abilities or achievement levels. This practice involves assigning students into “tracks” based on their prior achievement or ability level (Loveless, 2013), such as “honors,” “regular,” or “remedial” classes, with each track offering varying levels of curriculum difficulty and academic rigor. The primary goal of this placement is to create a more uniform learning environment, allowing teachers to tailor their instruction more effectively to students’ needs and enabling students to benefit from interactions with their peers (Steenbergen-Hu et al., 2016). However, it can promote educational inequalities, perpetuate stereotypes, and reinforce self-fulfilling prophecies, wherein students internalize and conform to expectations associated with their assigned track; this is especially seen among students belonging to ethnic minority groups and students of lower SES (e.g., Francis et al., 2017; Peterson et al., 2016). Furthermore, such separating of students based on “ability” contributes to achievement gaps between different social groups, as stereotype threat disproportionately affects marginalized students who are targets of negative stereotypes. Stereotype threat refers to the phenomenon where individuals experience anxiety or fear of confirming negative stereotypes about their social group, which can impair their performance in academic or other achievement-related tasks (Spencer et al., 2016).

Familial and Sociocultural Factors in Academic Achievement and Disparities

The role of family, peer, and cultural influences on academic achievement trajectories is multifaceted and complex as myriad factors influence students’ beliefs, behaviors, and experiences. At the familial level, there are SES, parental education level, parental involvement, as well as parental expectations. For example, the level of parental involvement in a child’s education, including monitoring homework, attending school events, and communicating with teachers, is strongly associated with academic success (Harper et al, 2012).

At the social level, school climate, disciplinary practices, peer pressure, and influence of academic motivation are some of the forces that can drive a teen’s academic achievement trajectory. School climate is defined as “the quality and character of school life,” which is derived from “patterns of people’s experiences of school life and reflects norms, goals, values, interpersonal relationships, teaching, learning and leadership practices, and organizational structures” (Cohen et al., 2009, p. 182). Research shows that a positive school climate helps protect against the negative contribution of poor SES background on academic achievement (Berkowitz et al., 2017).

A longitudinal study conducted in Los Angeles high schools found that students who experienced authoritative school environments, characterized by high levels of support and structure, exhibited higher levels of self-efficacy and grit in subsequent years (Wong et al., 2021). Additionally, these students reported fewer depressive symptoms, less hopelessness, and reduced stress at school and about the future over time. The study highlights the significant association between a supportive and warm school climate and improved social-emotional health among adolescents. It suggests that interventions focusing on enhancing relationships with teachers and implementing supportive disciplinary practices may be beneficial for promoting the social-emotional well-being of students (Wong et al., 2021). Additionally, one’s cultural capital, cultural values and beliefs about education, and cultural identity impact academic performance and achievement trajectory. Specifically, cultural resources such as language, knowledge, values, and traditions passed down within communities can influence students’ academic achievement (e.g., Andersen & Jaeger, 2015).

School absenteeism (i.e., temporary periods of unexcused school absence) and permanent school dropout are both complex issues influenced by various risk factors that can occur at the individual, family, social, school, and community levels. According to the NCES (2018), 13 to 15 percent of eighth to twelfth graders were absent at least three days a month, and approximately 6 percent were absent at least five days a month. A comprehensive report from the U.S. Department of Education (2016) revealed that students with disabilities exhibited higher rates of chronic absenteeism compared to their peers without disabilities. Similarly, Native American and Pacific Islander students displayed a greater tendency for chronic absenteeism when compared to students from other racial and ethnic backgrounds. Additionally, non-ELL students were found to have a higher likelihood of chronic absenteeism in comparison to their ELL counterparts (Garcia & Weiss, 2018).

Understanding the reasons why teens drop out of high school is fundamental to improving intervention efforts to promote graduation. Risk factors for school absenteeism include negative attitudes toward school, problematic substance use, both externalizing and internalizing behaviors, and limited parent-school involvement (Gubbels et al., 2019). In terms of dropout, risk factors include a history of poor academic achievement, lower IQ, and learning difficulties (Gubbels et al., 2019). In addition, earlier research found extreme parental permissiveness to be associated with higher rates of dropping out (Rumberger et al., 1990). In a similar vein, researchers conducted a survey with young adults who left high school prior to completion. The researchers identified several influential stressors that increased the decision to leave school including mobility, family dynamics, peer influences, school engagement and environment, health issues, and involvement in crime. Issues related to school engagement and the overall school environment were among the most common reasons (McDermott et al., 2019). Hence, addressing the risk factors for school absenteeism and dropout requires a comprehensive, multifaceted approach that involves collaboration between schools, families, communities, and policymakers.

Interventions

Of note is a large-scale intervention undertaken in the United States in the 1950s and 1960s, namely the racial integration of schools (Pickren, 2004; Stanley, 2017). In Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that “separate but equal” educational access and services were inherently unequal and ordered an end to racial segregation in the U.S. education system. By the mid-1970s, the first Black students who were young children at the time of the original ruling and its reaffirmation ten years later showed dramatic increases in academic achievement on national standardized tests.

What this highlights is that large-scale improvements in social status and access to resources, along with a general push toward leveling the socioeconomic playing field, can have a big impact on learning for minority subgroups. This evidence points a path forward: as societies address equity gaps in a variety of domains of life, we should see generational increases in achievement levels (Hanushek et al., 2019). Over time, group-level achievement gaps should close with continued prevention and intervention efforts focused on creating equity.

The Brown decision is an example of a large-scale, societywide intervention. Psychologists working in educational settings also focus on identifying individual-level psychological factors that have some bearing on educational outcomes. Some key ones include self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2017), expectancy-value theory (Harackiewicz et al., 2016), the stereotype threat process (Spencer et al., 2016), the concept of self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997; Schöber et al., 2018), and the collection of achievement motivation ideas currently known as growth mindset (Dweck, 2017). Across these diverse psychological processes and applications, one theme emerges: a student’s level of achievement motivation is strongly sensitive to the social environment. Adolescent learners in particular are highly attuned to the achievement-related messages they receive from their peers, teachers, parents, and broader culture.