The following websites and articles can inform the inclusive teaching approaches of STEM faculty.
Inclusive Teaching. Evidence-Based Teaching Guide. CBE-Life Sciences Education.
Dewsbury B & Brame C. (2019). Inclusive Teaching. CBE-LSE 18(2).
“This guide presents research studies and resources related to inclusive teaching. The guide defines inclusive teaching as teaching practices that make the class environment and interactions welcoming and that provide opportunities for success for all students. The guide focuses primarily on inclusivity across race, ethnicity, and gender, but the ‘deep teaching’ model on which it is based provides a philosophy that can guide inclusion across other differences.”
Chaney KE, Sanchez DT, Remedios JD. (2018). We are in this together: How the presence of similarly stereotyped allies buffer against identity threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 79, 410-422. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.09.005
Abstract: Past research has demonstrated that ingroup experts buffer against the negative effects of identity threat on working memory as they are believed to be less likely to hold negative stereotypes about ingroup members. The present research examined, for the first time, whether the presence of a stigmatized outgroup expert whose stereotype content is similar to women’s, but not a stigmatized outgroup experts whose stereotype content is dissimilar to women’s, mitigates the cognitive interference stemming from identity threat for White women, and identifies a novel individual difference variable, stigma solidarity, which facilitates identification of such allies. Across six studies we demonstrated that White women perceived a Black male expert as less likely than White men to hold negative stereotypes about women’s intelligence (Study 1, 2), especially if women were high in stigma solidarity (Study 3, 6), mitigating cognitive interference (Study 2, 4). Further, an outgroup expert who was not similarly stereotyped (i.e., Asian male) did not mitigate these identity threat effects (Study 5, 6). Thus, we contend that White women, especially those high in stigma solidarity, perceive similarly stereotyped outgroup experts as less likely to hold negative stereotypes about their intelligence, buffering against identity threats in such settings. This adds to a growing literature identifying the conditions under which intraminority relations can serve to expand contextual cues that signal identity safety.
Johnson IR, Pietri ES, Fullilove F, Mowrer S. (2019). Exploring Identity-Safety Cues and Allyship Among Black Women Students in STEM Environments. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 036168431983092 DOI: 10.1177/0361684319830926
Abstract: Black women are underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) and report feeling unwelcome in STEM. A successful scientist exemplar or role model may signal to Black women they are valued in STEM environments. We investigated who acts as an identity-safety cue for Black women. In Study 1, Black women students who learned about a Black man or a Black woman professor in a hypothetical School of Science and Engineering reported greater anticipated belonging and trust, relative to those learning about a White man or a White woman professor. In Study 2, we recruited Black women STEM majors from a predominantly White institution and a women-only historically Black college. We examined how both groups identified role models in STEM and assessed how perceptions that role models were allies related to belonging in the institution and belonging in STEM. Across both educational environments, having Black women and Black men role models, and perceiving role models who lacked a common racial identity as allies, positively related to belonging in the institution. We encourage the use of Black exemplars and role models, as well as allies, in interventions geared toward increasing belonging among Black women in STEM. Additional online materials for this article are available to PWQ subscribers on PWQ’s website at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/0361684319830926and a podcast for instructors who want to use this article for teaching is available on PWQ’s website at http://journals.sagepub.com/page/pwq/suppl/index
Raabe IJ, Boda Z, Stadtfeld C. (2019). The Social Pipeline: How Friend Influence and Peer Exposure Widen the STEM Gender Gap. The Sociology of Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040718824095
Abstract: Individuals’ favorite subjects in school can predetermine their educational and occupational careers. If girls develop weaker preferences for science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM), it can contribute to macrolevel gender inequalities in income and status. Relying on large-scale panel data on adolescents from Sweden (218 classrooms, 4,998 students), we observe a widening gender gap in preferring STEM subjects within a year (girls, 19 to 15 percent; boys, 21 to 20 percent). By applying newly developed random-coefficient multilevel stochastic actor-oriented models on social network data (27,428 friendships), we investigate how social context contributes to those changes. We find strong evidence that students adjust their preferences to those of their friends (friend influence). Moreover, girls tend to retain their STEM preferences when other girls in their classroom also like STEM (peer exposure). We conclude that these mechanisms amplify preexisting preferences and thereby contribute to the observed dramatic widening of the STEM gender gap.
Riegle-Crumb C, King B, Irizarry Y. (2019). Does STEM Stand Out? Examining Racial/Ethnic Gaps in Persistence Across Postsecondary Fields. Educational Researcher, 48(3), 133-144. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/0013189X19831006
Abstract:Informed by the theoretical lens of opportunity hoarding, this study considers whether STEM postsecondary fields stand apart via the disproportionate exclusion of Black and Latina/o youth. Utilizing national data from the Beginning Postsecondary Study (BPS), the authors investigate whether Black and Latina/o youth who begin college as STEM majors are more likely to depart than their White peers, either by switching fields or by leaving college without a degree, and whether patterns of departure in STEM fields differ from those in non-STEM fields. Results reveal evidence of persistent racial/ethnic inequality in STEM degree attainment not found in other fields.
Sue DW, Alsaidi S, Awad MN, Glaeser E, Calle CZ, & Mendez N. (2019). Disarming racial microaggressions: Microintervention strategies for targets, White allies, and bystanders. American Psychologist, 74(1), 128-142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000296
Abstract: Given the immense harm inflicted on individuals and groups of color via prejudice and discrimination, it becomes imperative for our nation to begin the process of disrupting, dismantling, and disarming the constant onslaught of micro- and macroaggressions. For too long, acceptance, silence, passivity, and inaction have been the predominant, albeit ineffective, strategies for coping with microaggressions. Inaction does nothing but support and proliferate biased perpetrator behaviors which occur at individual, institutional and societal levels. This article introduces a new strategic framework developed for addressing microaggressions that moves beyond coping and survival to concrete action steps and dialogues that targets, allies, and bystanders can perform (microinterventions). A review of responses to racist acts, suggest that microaggression reactions/interventions may be primarily to (a) remain passive, retreat, or give up; (b) strike back or hurt the aggressor; (c) stop, diminish, deflect, or put an end to the harmful act; (d) educate the perpetrator; (e) validate and support the targets; (f) act as an ally; (g) seek social support; (h) enlist outside authority or institutional intervention; or (h) achieve any combination of these objectives. We organize these responses into four major strategic goals of microinterventions: (a) make the invisible visible, (b) disarm the microaggression, (c) educate the perpetrator, and (d) seek external reinforcement or support. The objectives and rationale for each goal are discussed, along with specific microintervention tactics to employ and examples of how they are executed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)