An official website of the United States government
This qualitative study examines how race/ethnicity and gender influence the transformation of student-faculty relationships into valued forms of social capital for students career-related opportunities career opportunities within Science, Technology, Mathematics, and Engineering (STEM) contexts. Through retrospective interviews with 40 STEM graduates, the data revealed: (1) that experiences of racism and sexism among women of color affected their ability to attend office hours and build strong relationships with professors; (2) that while White females experienced sexism from faculty, their White privilege lessened the negative effects associated with their gender; (3) that being exposed to diverse faculty facilitated conversations between female students and students of color and their professors about their career pathways; and (4) that the negative influence of race/ethnicity and gender on student-faculty relationships was alleviated, but not eliminated, through research engagement.
more »
« less
“I don’t believe that I have been wanted”: Processes of Overinclusion and Exclusion in Racialized and Gendered Organizations
Many studies document that faculty of color, and particularly women of color, find the academy unwelcoming. Yet research that centers intersectional understanding of the mechanisms leading to these inequalities is underdeveloped. We identify three context-dependent mechanisms of racial and gender disadvantage among faculty: active exclusion, overinclusion, and passive exclusion. Taking an explicitly intersectional approach that builds on relational inequality theory, our study focuses on 32 faculty of color, including 18 women and 14 men, comparing their experiences to 30 same-rank white departmental colleagues. Comparing the experiences of faculty who share the same rank and department but differ by race and gender provides a deeper understanding of how race and gender inequalities intersect and are shaped by organizational processes. Active exclusion involves the devaluation of BIPOC faculty’s research, as well the barring of access to resources and positions. Overinclusion is characterized by the overreliance of the university on the labor of faculty of color, particularly women of color, without appropriate compensation. Finally, we conceptualize a more passive kind of exclusion, where BIPOC faculty are left out of collaborations, mentoring, and decision-making relative to white colleagues. Moving beyond rhetoric to disrupting racism in the academy requires addressing overinclusion, and both active and passive forms of exclusion.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1824090
- PAR ID:
- 10536891
- Publisher / Repository:
- Oxford
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Social Problems
- ISSN:
- 0037-7791
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- faculty higher education intersectionality race gender inclusion
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)A pilot inventory to develop measures of bias and discrimination experienced by engineering doctoral students asked if they have been treated unfairly by their primary advisor, secondary advisor, and other faculty. Analyses of pilot data (n = 250) revealed Women, Students of Color, and sexual minorities perceived experiences of unfair treatment in intricate patterns. Post hoc analyses show that Women experience more incidences of unfair treatment than men. Race/ethnicity identity groups report a different number of unfair treatment incidences, with Students of Color generally reporting more experiences than white students. Being a sexual minority contributed to reporting more incidences of unfair treatment. Unfair treatment from faculty significantly predicted students changing and considering changing research labs when controlling for gender, race/ethnicity, and sexuality. Unfair treatment from faculty significantly impacted engineering identity when controlling for gender, race/ethnicity, sexuality, lab changers, and change considerers. Analyses of pilot data demonstrated the negative impact of unfair treatment on students and their development as engineers.more » « less
-
Background: Extensive research has documented the importance of faculty advisors for graduate students’ experiences and outcomes. Recent research has begun to provide more nuanced accounts illuminating different dimensions of advisor support as well as attending to inequalities in students’ experiences with advisors.Purpose: We extend the research on graduate student advisor relationships in two important ways. First, building on the concept of social capital, and in particular the work on institutional agents, we illuminate specific benefits associated with student-advisor relationships. Second, we advance prior work on inequality in advisor relationships by examining students’ experiences at the intersection of race and gender. Research Design: To illuminate the nuances of graduate students’ experiences with advisors, this study included interviews with 79 students pursuing PhD’s in biological sciences. Thematic coding revealed several important dimensions of benefits associated with advisor relationships. Corresponding codes were grouped into three categories, describing three groups of students with notably different experiences with advisors. Findings: The data revealed three distinct student-advisor relationship profiles which we term scholars, subordinates, and marginals. The three groups had vastly different experiences with access to knowledge and resources, access to networks, and cultivation of independence. Moreover, the distribution across these three groups was highly unequal with unique patterns observed at the intersection of race and gender. White men benefited from both racial and gender privilege and were notably overrepresented in the scholars group while White women and racial/ethnic minority (REM) students were more likely to be socialized as subordinates. REM men had the least favorable experiences with the majority of them being in the marginal category, along with a substantial proportion of White and REM women. Notably, even experiences of negative relationships with advisors were gendered and raced: REM men’s negative relationships with advisors were characterized by “benign neglect” while women primarily experienced conflictual relationships Conclusion and Recommendations: The findings illuminate important consequences of student-advisor relationships and pronounced inequalities in who has access to benefits accrued through those relationships. Creating more equitable experiences will necessitate substantial attention to improving mentoring and eliminating gender and racial/ethnic inequalities in faculty support.more » « less
-
Our study highlights specific ways in which race and gender create inequality in the workplace. Using in-depth interviews with 67 biology PhD students, we show how engagement with research and service varies by both gender and race. By considering the intersection between gender and race, we find not only that women biology graduate students do more service than men, but also that racial and ethnic minority men do more service than white men. White men benefit from a combination of racial and gender privilege, which places them in the most advantaged position with respect to protected research time and opportunities to build collaborations and networks beyond their labs. Racial/ethnic minority women emerge as uniquely disadvantaged in terms of their experiences relative to other groups. These findings illuminate how gendered organizations are also racialized, producing distinct experiences for women and men from different racial groups, and thus contribute to theorizing the intersectional nature of inequality in the workplace.more » « less
-
Undergraduate research experiences are important for students to gain better insight into what they want. Students are paired with mentors and this can lead to both positive and negative experiences. In engineering, especially, this is a chilly climate where if you are not an abled cis white male, it is almost inevitable that you will not be part of the majority in the field. This can lead to stress, anxiety, and feelings of isolation and hopelessness in a person’s academic and career pursuits. Race and gender disparities do exist in the field, where the intersectionality between women and students of color promotes the greatest achievement gap. These students, as well as faculty, are represented least in the field. Social, as well as institutional barriers, inhibit success, and our goal is to explore how we can reduce race and gender imbalance in the field of engineering. A solution is to see the intersectionality between race and gender in these women of color in STEM. “[R]esearch must focus on illuminating women of color as political subjects and the gender, racial, class, and sexual politics that impact their lives” (Crenshaw, 1991), and focus on illuminating women of color and their experiences. We have to take seriously the insights of women of color, effectively situating their work on intersectionality as subjugated knowledge (Leslie McCall, 2005). This qualitative research is based on 33 interviews of mentors and minorities protegés within the Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation (LSAMP) program in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) across four different universities within a statewide university system, in the United States of America.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spae043
