The Effect of College Student Demographic Variables on Teacher Enmeshment

Interactions between students and faculty outside of class appear to be linked to greater achievement during and after college (Anaya & Cole, 2001; Hathaway, Nagda, & Gregerman, 2002). However, sometimes there can be blurred personal boundaries and a lack of autonomy in relationships or what has been labeled enmeshment. The purpose of the current pilot study was to investigate the effect of race/ethnicity, gender, year in college, and college major on faculty-student relationships and teacher enmeshment. Teacher enmeshment was measured with the Teacher Enmeshment subscale of the Separation-Individuation Test of Adolescence (SITA; Levine & Saintonge, 1993). A sample of 165 undergraduate and graduate students from education and psychology classes at a small, private liberal arts institution in the Northeast participated. No significant differences among the different demographic groups were found on the total teacher enmeshment score. However, significant differences were found among students with different majors, by gender, and by race on individual items. Implications of these findings and suggestions for future research are provided.

Conventionalism and the World as Bare Sense-Data

We are confident of many of the judgements we make as to what sorts of alterations the members of nature’s kinds can survive, and what sorts of events mark the ends of their existences. But is our confidence based on empirical observation of nature’s kinds and their members? Conventionalists deny that we can learn empirically which properties are essential to the members of nature’s kinds. Judgements of sameness in kind between members, and of numerical sameness of a member across time, merely project our conventions of individuation. Our confidence is warranted because apart from those conventions there are no phenomena of kind-sameness or of numerical sameness across time. There is just “stuff” displaying properties. This paper argues that conventionalists can assign no properties to the “stuff” beyond immediate phenomenal properties. Consequently they cannot explain how each of us comes to be able to wield “our conventions”.