Holding the Space: Individual- and Group-level Factors Predicting Member Retention in Gender-Sexuality Alliances.

Involvement in extracurricular groups is associated with positive outcomes for youth. Gender-Sexuality Alliances (GSAs) are school-based clubs that may provide benefits to sexual and gender minority (SGM) youth and their allies, yet little is known about what factors predict member retention. The current study explores individual- and group-level predictors of youth's sustained or discontinued membership in GSAs during a school year. Participants were 410 youth (Mage = 15.56; 83% sexual minority; 57% cisgender female; 70% White) and 50 advisors in 32 GSAs purposively sampled across Massachusetts who completed surveys at the beginning and end of the school year. Sexual minority youth and youth who took on more leadership roles at the beginning of the year were less likely to have left their GSA by the end of the school year. Youth who perceived higher levels of social support from their GSA trended less likely to leave their GSA as well, although the association was not significant. Youth who engaged in more advocacy were more likely to have left. Youth in GSAs with greater structure to their meetings were less likely to discontinue their membership; specifically, having a meeting agenda was uniquely predictive of member retention. Implications for GSA inclusivity and practices to promote retention within GSAs and similar social justice-oriented clubs are discussed.

Greater Engagement in Gender-Sexuality Alliances (GSAs) and GSA Characteristics Predict Youth Empowerment and Reduced Mental Health Concerns.

Extracurricular groups can promote healthy development, yet the literature has given limited attention to indirect associations between extracurricular involvement and mental health or to sexual and gender minority youth. Among 580 youth (Mage  = 15.59, range = 10-20 years) and adult advisors in 38 Gender-Sexuality Alliances (GSAs), multilevel structural equation models showed that greater engagement in GSAs over the school year predicted increased perceived peer validation, self-efficacy to promote social justice, and hope (baseline adjusted). Through increased hope, greater engagement indirectly predicted reduced depressive and anxiety symptoms at the year's end (baseline adjusted). GSAs whose members had more mental health discussions and more meetings reported reduced mental health concerns. Findings suggest how groups addressing issues of equity and justice improve members' health.

Extracurricular Settings as a Space to Address Sociopolitical Crises: The Case of Discussing Immigration in Gender-Sexuality Alliances Following the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election.

School-based extracurricular settings could promote dialogue on sociopolitical crises. We considered immigration discussions within Gender-Sexuality Alliances (GSAs), which address multiple systems of oppression. Among 361 youth and 58 advisors in 38 GSAs (19 in 2016-2017/Year 1; 19 in 2017-2018/Year 2), youth in Year 1 reported increased discussions from baseline throughout the remaining school year; differences were non-significant in Year 2. In both years, youth reporting greater self-efficacy to promote social justice, and GSAs with advisors reporting greater self-efficacy to address culture, race, and immigration discussed immigration more over the year (adjusting for baseline). In interviews, 38 youth described circumstances promoting or inhibiting discussions: demographic representation, open climates, critical reflection, fear or consequences of misspeaking, discomfort, agenda restrictions, and advisor roles.

Gay-Straight Alliances vary on dimensions of youth socializing and advocacy: factors accounting for individual and setting-level differences.

Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs) are school-based youth settings that could promote health. Yet, GSAs have been treated as homogenous without attention to variability in how they operate or to how youth are involved in different capacities. Using a systems perspective, we considered two primary dimensions along which GSAs function to promote health: providing socializing and advocacy opportunities. Among 448 students in 48 GSAs who attended six regional conferences in Massachusetts (59.8 % LGBQ; 69.9 % White; 70.1 % cisgender female), we found substantial variation among GSAs and youth in levels of socializing and advocacy. GSAs were more distinct from one another on advocacy than socializing. Using multilevel modeling, we identified group and individual factors accounting for this variability. In the socializing model, youth and GSAs that did more socializing activities did more advocacy. In the advocacy model, youth who were more actively engaged in the GSA as well as GSAs whose youth collectively perceived greater school hostility and reported greater social justice efficacy did more advocacy. Findings suggest potential reasons why GSAs vary in how they function in ways ranging from internal provisions of support, to visibility raising, to collective social change. The findings are further relevant for settings supporting youth from other marginalized backgrounds and that include advocacy in their mission.