View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Incorporating Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Science: Lessons Learned from an Undergraduate Seminar

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Incorporating Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Science: Lessons Learned from an Undergraduate Seminar
Language: English
Authors: Ramachandran, Aishwarya (ORCID 0000-0002-1590-741X), Mouat, Isobel C., Öberg, Gunilla
Source: Science Education. Jan 2023 107(1):180-202.
Availability: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 23
Publication Date: 2023
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Science Instruction, Equal Education, Inclusion, Diversity, Barriers, Teaching Methods, COVID-19, Pandemics, Racism, College Faculty, Teacher Role, Undergraduate Students, Teaching Experience, Aggression, Teacher Student Relationship
DOI: 10.1002/sce.21768
ISSN: 0036-8326
1098-237X
Abstract: Questions of equity, diversity, and inclusion in the sciences have taken center stage in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and Black Lives Matter movement of 2020. This paper focuses on the experiences of academics engaging in such work, particularly in their roles as educators, by sharing two of the authors' experiences introducing equity, diversity, and inclusion initiatives in a first-year science course at a Canadian university. Using critical research methodologies like narrative inquiry and memory work, we look at three separate instances where complex personal, institutional and course attributes fostered, allowed, or hindered efforts to bring these initiatives into the classroom. We consider how problematic incidents and obstacles relating to the organization of content on equity, diversity, and inclusion in science cropped up during the process, how they were perceived and handled in the moment, as well as the authors' reflections, takeaways, and lessons learned from the experience. These stories suggest that efforts to center discussions about equity, diversity, and inclusion in undergraduate science classrooms can be unpredictable and complex, particularly at the day-to-day level; this is especially the case when handling subtler microaggressions rather than clear instances of discrimination or harassment. Our study points to the importance of creating a more permanent institutional memory for initiatives that outlive those who initiated and organized them, so that they become embedded within the culture of a course or department.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2022
Accession Number: EJ1358273
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwHTT54RA70ZN7iTkWcZcPm7AAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDIL51VYzrjgzwvgLvgIBEICBm8qs1WO6V9-Gtqbs0eq8aR8R0fXS_L6vAqHoB8efSEMQaqZIguF5uKSORrjVHzsBMzG-8OKDq3fOiMLsAPJJnxcguBRfm8V3MNRRl55DNZ5O0JyaHFAyJOb0D_Oqv_L9u7Q9RLgijRw0rb2br07INzwxfZjbtHYu_yXV6r5A2jo3uTN8hhFxdPPz6XNOUFvgH19JDiSZbg_NoNGC
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0160719088;sed01jan.23;2022Dec13.07:22;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0160719088-1">Incorporating equity, diversity, and inclusion in science: Lessons learned from an undergraduate seminar </title> <p>Questions of equity, diversity, and inclusion in the sciences have taken center stage in light of the COVID‐19 pandemic and Black Lives Matter movement of 2020. This paper focuses on the experiences of academics engaging in such work, particularly in their roles as educators, by sharing two of the authors' experiences introducing equity, diversity, and inclusion initiatives in a first‐year science course at a Canadian university. Using critical research methodologies like narrative inquiry and memory work, we look at three separate instances where complex personal, institutional and course attributes fostered, allowed, or hindered efforts to bring these initiatives into the classroom. We consider how problematic incidents and obstacles relating to the organization of content on equity, diversity, and inclusion in science cropped up during the process, how they were perceived and handled in the moment, as well as the authors' reflections, takeaways, and lessons learned from the experience. These stories suggest that efforts to center discussions about equity, diversity, and inclusion in undergraduate science classrooms can be unpredictable and complex, particularly at the day‐to‐day level; this is especially the case when handling subtler microaggressions rather than clear instances of discrimination or harassment. Our study points to the importance of creating a more permanent institutional memory for initiatives that outlive those who initiated and organized them, so that they become embedded within the culture of a course or department.</p> <p>Keywords: Canada; diversity; equity; inclusion; undergraduate</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-2">THINKING THROUGH EQUITY, DIVERSITY, AND INCLUSION IN STEM HIGHER EDUCATION</hd> <p>It is commonly argued that science literacy is not just a question of knowing the facts but also having the ability to evaluate and weigh those facts in a broader social context. This includes grappling with the considerable impact of gender and race on science. Since 2017, the #metoo movement has had a widespread, lasting impact on various social institutions by making it more admissible to call out, talk about, and institute remedies against gender‐based discrimination and aggressions (Braileanu et al., [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref1">10</reflink>]; Levy & Mattsson, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref2">64</reflink>]). The sciences have had their moments of reckoning since with regard to the presence of rampant workplace sexism, harassment, and discrimination (Neill, [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref3">70</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref4">71</reflink>] Rodríguez Mega). Documentaries and films like "Picture a scientist" and "Radioactive" speak to a heightened awareness of the realities that face underrepresented minorities in academia, providing concrete examples of overt (and covert) systemic discrimination as well as day‐to‐day microaggressions.</p> <p>In the wake of the COVID‐19 pandemic, questions of equity, diversity, and inclusion in academia have received increased scrutiny and attention with numerous recent publications pointing to an exacerbation of the existing gender gap in academia (Daalen et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref5">20</reflink>]; Flaherty, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref6">27</reflink>]; Wigginton et al., [<reflink idref="bib103" id="ref7">103</reflink>]; Zimmer, [<reflink idref="bib109" id="ref8">109</reflink>]). These studies suggest that the research productivity of women academics, for instance, is greatly affected by the pandemic because of the disproportionate burden they often bear in domestic settings (an issue further compounded by lockdowns and the closure of schools) and their already precarious and contingent academic positions (which can often involve larger teaching loads). Women faculty of color have often reported facing marginalization, subtle discrimination, institutional sexism and racism, gender and race bias, as well as dealing with students who repeatedly challenged their intelligence and authority (Ford, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref9">28</reflink>]; Jayakumar et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref10">53</reflink>]; Turner et al., [<reflink idref="bib99" id="ref11">99</reflink>]; Young et al., [<reflink idref="bib108" id="ref12">108</reflink>]). Furthermore, following the Black Lives Matter protests of 2020, numerous public statements have been made by scientific academic organizations such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the American Medical Association among many others recognizing, condemning, and pledging to counteract systemic racism in the United States (Cartier, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref13">14</reflink>]; Ham, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref14">40</reflink>]; Yancy, [<reflink idref="bib107" id="ref15">107</reflink>]). These are all promising signs suggesting that the academic scientific community is on the path to seriously thinking about and addressing some of the systemic discriminatory practices that plague our universities, colleges, and research institutions (Barber et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref16">5</reflink>]; Blithe & Elliott, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref17">9</reflink>]; JEM Editorial Team, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref18">54</reflink>]).</p> <p>Feminist philosophers have long argued for the importance of including diverse viewpoints in scientific research—both for reasons of equity as well as to improve scientific practice itself (Fricker, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref19">31</reflink>]; Haraway, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref20">41</reflink>]; Harding, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref21">42</reflink>]; Keller, [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref22">60</reflink>]; Longino, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref23">65</reflink>]; Wylie, [<reflink idref="bib106" id="ref24">106</reflink>]). In particular, standpoint theory attempted to make values and interests in science such as androcentrism, heteronormativity, and Eurocentrism transparent and clarify their impact (Tuana, [<reflink idref="bib98" id="ref25">98</reflink>]). Excluding minority groups from scientific research can weaken the whole enterprise because it is then prone to the influences of hidden values that are not carefully considered, accounted for, and consciously incorporated into research (Douglas, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref26">22</reflink>]; Elliott, [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref27">25</reflink>]). In response to the Black Lives Matter movement, several leading scientific publications have begun to publicly advocate for diversity in science and argue for its epistemic benefits (Forrester, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref28">29</reflink>]; Tilghman et al., [<reflink idref="bib97" id="ref29">97</reflink>]). More specifically, studies into the attrition of women and other underrepresented minorities in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) higher education point to a series of factors that lead nondominant groups to feel as if they do not belong, are unwelcome, or explicitly unwanted (Duranczyk et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref30">24</reflink>]). Among these are inhospitable departmental cultures, teacher‐centered pedagogical practices, male students' presumptuous classroom behavior, institutionalized sexism and racism, and limited access to mentoring relationships (Blair et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref31">8</reflink>]). Campus environments often promote silence about issues of equity, diversity, and inclusion, rarely asking students, faculty members, and administrators about their racial or gendered realities (Harper & Hurtado, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref32">43</reflink>]). Seymour and Hewitt ([<reflink idref="bib84" id="ref33">84</reflink>]) even go so far as to point out that university STEM education has evolved as an approved way to induct young men into the adult fraternities of science, mathematics, and engineering.</p> <p>In their efforts to implement a university‐wide bias awareness programme, Goltz and Sotirin ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref34">36</reflink>]) describe how, despite their experiences with an awareness of gendered, racial, and other forms of implicit bias in the higher education settings as well as explicit support and funding from the university administration, they came up against considerable resistance from participants to engage in the sustained ideological and emotional work necessary to effect social change. The university thus becomes a site that excludes and marginalizes minorities in subtle, sophisticated and ironic ways, ranging from everyday interactions with students and colleagues to institutional practices that are often well‐meaning but ultimately ineffective (Henry, James, et al., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref35">47</reflink>]). In this paper, we similarly describe our own experiences facing resistance, uncertainty, and encouragement when trying to organize and deploy equity, diversity, and inclusion‐related teaching material in an undergraduate science course at a large public Canadian university. We tell three stories where the second and third authors experienced the intersection of individual, interpersonal, and institutional power dynamics during their efforts to successfully design and bring such initiatives into the science classroom. We use these stories to illustrate and explore how microaggressions and subtle forms of discrimination may arise quite unexpectedly in academic settings, regardless of planning and preparation. We also describe how the second and third author perceived and handled these incidents as they occurred, as well as their reflections and takeaways from the experience. While our aim had initially been to teach undergraduate science students about equity, diversity, and inclusion, with a focus on gender and race, these incidents alerted us to the fact that we first needed to pay very careful attention to the views of the teaching team and other faculty associated with the course. We found that the teaching team for the course, as well as other authority figures, responded with the greatest ambivalence to attempts to integrate equity content into the curriculum, despite seeming encouraging and interested. We found ourselves wading through a quagmire of clashing views and personalities belonging primarily to the very cadre of instructors and faculty members we expected would play central roles in organizing and teaching equity, diversity, and inclusion material to science students. Through the process of recounting, writing up, and sharing some of these incidents among each other, we thus began to see that our efforts required understanding, tackling, and reflecting upon the conflicting dynamics involved in implementing equity initiatives in a large institution—"at once tenuous and fragile, knotty, and complex, enabling and disenabling" (Spicer & Levay, [<reflink idref="bib89" id="ref36">89</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-3">MICROAGGRESSIONS IN STEM HIGHER EDUCATION</hd> <p>To improve science workplaces and learning environments in the university, we must reflect more deeply on routine interactions and norms otherwise taken for granted by students, faculty, staff, and administrators (Posselt, [<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref37">76</reflink>]). These day‐to‐day interactions or "the way things are done around here" make up the hidden curriculum of science education. They normalize certain behaviors and attitudes to the extent that they are seen as part of the landscape of the sciences and certainly not something to be questioned or probed into. Often, these interactions take the form of microaggressions—subtle, yet harmful forms of discriminatory behavior experienced by members of oppressed groups. Sue et al. ([<reflink idref="bib92" id="ref38">92</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib93" id="ref39">93</reflink>]) characterize microaggressions as "brief, everyday exchanges that send denigrating messages to people of color because they belong to a racial minority group." They point out that microaggressions often occur unconsciously, taking the form of "subtle snubs" and "dismissive looks, gestures, and tones." Because these interactions can be pervasive and automatic in day‐to‐day interactions, they are often dismissed and glossed over as being innocent and innocuous. They are assumed not to constitute real harm, and those who commit them often regard themselves as committed to egalitarian and progressive values—making them particularly insidious and hard to detect (Friedlaender, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref40">32</reflink>]). Solorzano et al. ([<reflink idref="bib88" id="ref41">88</reflink>]), who use critical race theory as a framework to examine racial microaggressions, found that even within the context of elite undergraduate universities where opportunities appear to be ostensibly equal for all students, African American college students regularly experienced inequality and discrimination in more subtle and hidden forms; feeling invisible within the classroom, bearing the brunt of faculty members' low academic expectations of them and the resulting unwarranted accusations of cheating on tests and exams, experiencing self‐doubt as a result of being stereotyped by their instructors and peers, and encountering racial discrimination and segregation while engaging in group activities with other students. In a study examining how Black, Latina, and Indigenous women science students reacted to their undergraduate science courses and professors, Johnson ([<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref42">55</reflink>]) describes how the students she interviewed were often discouraged by the large size of their lecture classes, particularly by having to ask and answer questions in front of hundreds of other students (thereby potentially exposing themselves as "not belonging" in a science program), as well as engaging in undergraduate research in competitive and hostile lab environments. These students were also negatively impacted by the narrow focus on decontextualized science and the construction of science as a gender‐ and race‐neutral meritocracy. Morton and Parsons similarly describe how their interviewees, black women students in the sciences, were highly aware of their race and gender identities, referring to them in isolation and together as a potentially risky identity. However, the students also described their identities as sources of positive self‐esteem, uniqueness, empowerment, and pride, particularly concerning their engagement with the sciences (Morton & Parsons, [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref43">68</reflink>]). Meanwhile, Young et al. ([<reflink idref="bib108" id="ref44">108</reflink>]) suggest that university employees report feeling valued or devalued based on their role/credential (e.g., staff vs. faculty members, student employees vs. faculty members), a change in accepted behavior by others based on their role (e.g., peoples' changing attitude when they find out someone is a student or a staff member), the actions they experience from others based on their role (e.g., being ignored, excluded, or interrupted), and the words used to talk about their role at the university to indicate their relative power within the institution. They claim that these are more than just insensitive comments because they impact people based on an identity associated with their status at the university, which in turn is related to the amount of higher education they attain (Young et al., [<reflink idref="bib108" id="ref45">108</reflink>]). Blithe and Elliott ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref46">9</reflink>]) identify how women faculty continue to experience microaggressions, work−life conflict, and low levels of institutional support influenced by their rank—assistant professors, for example, experience greater stressors than tenured faculty. Their participants point to the difficulty of identifying the nature of remarks from their colleagues, students, and others—for instance, left wondering if a negative interaction was rooted in their gender or race, or not. Indeed, even as overt examples of sexual harassment and racism may be widely recognized and condemned, day‐to‐day incidents of discrimination against women, people of color, and other minorities in science may not be noticed or taken seriously by either the perpetrators or the institutions they occur in. This is because they may not stand out as clear or egregious enough examples of discrimination, and as a result, more implicit forms of sexism and racism can easily and quietly embed themselves within the very fabric of academia, showing up in daily interactions within classrooms, lab groups, departments, and universities (Wofford & Blaney, [<reflink idref="bib105" id="ref47">105</reflink>]).</p> <p>The silencing effects of microaggressions—a skeptical stare, looking confused or unable to follow, repeatedly interrupting or questioning one's meaning can further intimidate and marginalize someone as a knower or learner (Harrison & Tanner, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref48">44</reflink>]; Kidd et al., [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref49">61</reflink>]). In such instances, it thus becomes all the more important to pay close attention to those incidents of marginalization or discrimination which are not easy to fully articulate or make sense of. Indeed, the inability of minorities to sufficiently understand or describe their experiences due to the poverty of conceptual resources available for such understanding has been described as "hermeneutical injustice" (Fricker, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref50">31</reflink>]; Kidd et al., [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref51">61</reflink>]). In other words, a hermeneutical injustice occurs when a "gap in collective interpretive resources puts someone at an unfair advantage when it comes to making sense of their social experience"—and given their epistemic strength and political influence, scientific institutions and their practices need to be carefully investigated as possible sites and sources of hermeneutical injustice towards those who may not be perceived or see themselves as "belonging." Ben Kotzee has even pointed out how "the selection of what is taught – what makes it onto the curriculum – has a deeper significance....[they] enable or block students' understanding of particular social experiences and encourage or inhibit the ability of students from particular cultures to express their particular understanding of the world" (Kotzee, [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref52">63</reflink>]). Even with top‐down support from institutions of higher education, equity, diversity, and inclusion content in the sciences may encounter considerable epistemic resistance because of the dominance of an "empirical‐analytic mindset valuing cause‐effect, problem–solution, and quantifiable evidence" (Goltz & Sotirin, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref53">36</reflink>]; Rodriguez et al., [<reflink idref="bib78" id="ref54">78</reflink>]). The rationale behind organizing this paper into "vignettes" or "stories" was thus to create an opportunity for us to recount, collectively make sense of, and ultimately amplify our experiences with the subtle ins and outs of microaggressions in a higher education setting. We used approaches such as narrative inquiry and memory work to embrace an explicitly feminist, embodied approach to story writing.</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-4">RESEARCH METHODOLOGY</hd> <p> <emph>Narrative inquiry</emph> is a research methodology with a long intellectual history in the field of education, particularly in studies of educational experience (Connelly & Clandinin, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref55">18</reflink>]). People tend to share and interpret their life experiences through stories. In this paper, we primarily refer to the approach taken by Hollingsworth, who has used narrative inquiry to document conversations between a group of schoolteachers in Berkeley, California, for over two decades (Hollingsworth, [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref56">49</reflink>]). Hollingsworth and her colleagues take a critical postmodern approach to narrative inquiry, which involves using informal, open‐ended conversations and note‐taking rather than structured interviews, as well as self‐reflective dialogue, writing, and observation to illustrate the power relations and social dynamics present in educational contexts (Clandinin, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref57">16</reflink>]; Hollingsworth et al., [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref58">50</reflink>]). Narratives, in this perspective, emerge out of a combination of their narrator's situatedness within a certain historical time and place, their perceptions of themselves and others, their relationships with other narrators, and the purpose of their conversation.</p> <p> <emph>Memory work</emph>, which was first proposed by Frigga Haug in the 1980s, is a methodology that is widely used to examine power relations (Bryant & Bryant, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref59">13</reflink>]; Haug, [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref60">45</reflink>]). Group members act as both research participants and researchers, writing down and using their experiences and memories as data, which are then analyzed and discussed with others (Stephenson & Kippax, [<reflink idref="bib90" id="ref61">90</reflink>]). The intention behind this approach is to use a narrative style that, through its matter‐of‐factness, encourages feelings and emotions that are not easily voiced to come to the fore in the discussions. Following the memory work methodology, we set out to write the stories using a strictly descriptive and matter‐of‐fact style, with the intention of avoiding conceptualization, interpretations, and self‐censorship. However, Gannon and Davies ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref62">33</reflink>]) caution that such embodied practices of remembering and writing do not give "direct access to 'buried' moments." The core idea of memory writing is that it allows the researchers to grapple with seemingly banal everyday events that make up the very fabric of insidious structures and patterns that are difficult to discern "just because these events appear so unimportant and unproblematic" (Jansson et al., [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref63">52</reflink>]).</p> <p>The third and second authors were directly involved in planning, organizing, and teaching the course, and they tell three stories about these efforts, describing the personal, institutional, and course attributes that were perceived to foster, allow, or hinder the work. In keeping with the methodological approaches described above, we use first names and a conversational format as we narrate personal experiences around teaching, pedagogy, and administration. When discussing these three stories, we consider how problematic incidents and obstacles relating to the organization of content on equity, diversity, and inclusion in science cropped up during the process, particularly subtle microaggressions and hostilities from other faculty members and instructors who did not perceive such subjects as relevant to the teaching of science. Here, we take a cue from Goltz and Sotirin ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref64">36</reflink>]), who suggest that firsthand experience can offer a valuable perspective on the lived complications of "change initiatives," which do not occur in a vacuum but rather in the context of ongoing changes and demands on campus and beyond.</p> <p>Within each story, we pay particular attention to how these incidents were perceived and handled by the authors in the moment, as well as their reflections, takeaways, and lessons learned from the experience. We agree with Rodriguez et al.'s observations that raising consciousness among faculty members about the need to dismantle systemic discrimination based on race and gender in the university, particularly within the context of science, is not the final step. It is necessary to transform this understanding into some form of action, moving from passively listening to seminars on diversity to engaging in self‐reflection and transformative practice (Rodriguez et al., [<reflink idref="bib78" id="ref65">78</reflink>]). While Rodriguez et al. do this in an ambitious project developing and implementing a longitudinal professional development program for faculty at an R1 institution, our interest lies primarily in engaging in an in‐depth reflection about the decisions made by the authors on the ground—describing specific instances where we encountered unexpected reactions or resistance from faculty associated with the course, how we mitigated the tensions which cropped up to continue engaging in equity, diversity, and inclusion work, how we tried to enlist further support to ensure these efforts lived on beyond our involvement in the course, as well as what we would have done differently upon further reflection.</p> <p>The paper emerged from informal conversations during 2020−2021 among the three authors about the second author's teaching‐as‐research (TAR) project "Teaching science beyond content: introducing the context‐dependent nature of science to first‐year students," which was conducted in the course during 2019–2020 and pointed to a need for facilitation of equity, diversity, and inclusion related discussions among students. The three authors discussed the complex process of introducing topics about equity, diversity, and inclusion in the sciences, with the second and third author sharing their experiences from the course. With the first author taking the lead, the group agreed to engage in more regular conversations about their experiences of including equity, diversity, and inclusion‐related work in higher education. The second and third authors agreed to write up some of their experiences as stories, with the intention of using these as further prompts for their conversations. They selected experiences that they felt illustrate how equity, diversity, and inclusion work at the university occur on the ground and the day‐to‐day decisions and compromises which often need to be made when working to organize and implement such initiatives. All three authors then reflected on and discussed the initial version of each story, attempting to clarify the meaning and intentions behind what was written, paying specific attention to the emotions felt in each instance, and trying to make sense of them within the context of their other professional experiences as students and teachers. They considered if there were any takeaways or lessons learned from each of the incidents and reflected on if and how they lined up with science education literature on equity, diversity, and inclusion, with a focus on gender and race.</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-5">SITUATING OURSELVES IN THE NARRATIVE</hd> <p>As the how and what of teaching and research related to gender and race are hotly debated and impacted by personal beliefs and attitudes, we wish to acknowledge that as individuals, our backgrounds, subjectivities, training, experiences and interests impact the research we do (Creswell & Creswell, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref66">19</reflink>]). We have written this positionality statement to be as transparent as possible and clearly describe our standpoints as researchers. Feminist scholars have long suggested that positioning oneself is a key practice in grounding or situating otherwise seemingly universal or objective knowledge within the very specific conditions in which it was produced (Haraway, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref67">41</reflink>]; Harding, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref68">42</reflink>]; Kobayashi, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref69">62</reflink>]; Rose, [<reflink idref="bib80" id="ref70">80</reflink>]). As women students, teachers, and academics, we share a deep interest in understanding the roots of gender and race‐based discrimination in the sciences and finding ways to tackle and mitigate it. All three of us have participated in workshops and courses on equity, diversity, and inclusion and experimented with different approaches to engaging with these topics as students, teachers, and supervisors. In the past few years, our interest has extended to include questions of intersectionality more explicitly, particularly as related to gender, race, ethnicity, and white privilege. None of us has any formal training in educational research, but all of us have conducted research collaboratively with scholars who do (Dahlgren & Oberg, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref71">21</reflink>]; Öberg & Campbell, [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref72">72</reflink>]; Öberg et al., [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref73">73</reflink>]; Wibeck et al., [<reflink idref="bib102" id="ref74">102</reflink>]). Through sharing various aspects of our academic and personal backgrounds, we hope to illustrate both our own (positive and negative) experiences dealing with equity, diversity, and inclusion in science education as well as the perspective from which we have dealt with them—as students, teaching assistants, and professors.</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-6">First author</hd> <p>I am a South Asian woman who moved to Canada from India for my undergraduate degree in the health sciences in 2013, later continuing as a graduate student in Kinesiology. As is typical of the experience of many undergraduate students, I often found myself in extremely large first and second‐year science and math courses (usually 150+ students/per class). I often perceived the environment of these classrooms as serious, impersonal, and extremely masculine—particularly since the professors and teaching assistants as well as the first five rows of students (who talked the most and asked the most questions throughout the course) were almost always men. Over the course of my undergraduate degree, I became extremely nervous and uncomfortable speaking up in these classes. This was even more so if I needed a concept to be further explained or clarified, since I believed that doing this would "out" me as someone who "really" doesn't belong in the sciences, even more so than I was already feeling. I eventually left the sciences altogether, completing my graduate research in what I perceived was a more welcoming academic environment in the humanities. I am now returning to questions of equity, diversity, and inclusion in science education as a Ph.D. student with a background and interest in science studies. While I was not directly involved with teaching the course, I spent many hours in conversation with the second and third authors about their experiences organizing and teaching the seminar and have found many areas of commonality and agreement with them as it pertains to thinking and teaching about the impacts of gender, race, class, and culture in science.</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-7">Second author</hd> <p>As a teaching assistant for a first‐year seminar in science between 2016 and 2018, and then instructor from 2019 to 2021, I have appreciated being a part of a teaching team that pays particular attention to equity, diversity, and inclusion. Maybe this is because it sits in contrast to the scientific communities in which I have been trained, both in the United States and Canada, that have portrayed diversity issues as "happening elsewhere." This approach might have permeated into me. I feel as though I have had an easy time in science—I am a white woman and have felt welcomed into labs and comfortable speaking up in classes and seminars—or maybe I have just been oblivious. I am still learning to "see" the issues around me and have appreciated my time in the course for helping me along this journey.</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-8">Third author</hd> <p>In 2001, I became a full professor in Sweden and took on a formal leadership role, I suddenly found myself in meeting after meeting faced by colleagues tacitly spewing microaggressions my way. I found this phenomenon both puzzling and exhausting—until then, my experience of sexism had been either overt (e.g., a slap on my behind) or theoretical. Like the second author, I too am a white woman, and I had—until then—felt welcomed into academia and comfortable speaking up in classes, seminars, and meetings. In my new role, I found it challenging to navigate covert microaggressions. In 2006, I moved to a large public university in Canada to become the director of an interdisciplinary research center with a large graduate program. I was relieved to find that it was easier to be a leader in this new environment, and I put it down to Sweden being less hierarchic than Canada: In Sweden, one is first a woman and then a boss, whereas I got the impression that in Canada, one is first boss and then a woman. About half of the faculty members in my new unit are white and about half are women. Even so, discussions about gender and race were, and are still very challenging topics and commonly treated as something "happening elsewhere." A recent survey among our students has pushed the agenda as it revealed that 25% have experienced gender discrimination. We are in the process of figuring out how to address the issues we have identified. One of the challenges is how to navigate personal tensions and allegiances versus structural barriers. I find intersectional conflicts particularly challenging to deal with, not least covert microaggressions from colleagues who are nonwhite men, as I have gotten the sense that I may be framed as being racist if I raise concerns about behavior that I perceive is sexist. It is truly a delicate balancing act to understand and acknowledge forms of marginalization that these colleagues might have experienced that I have not, without resorting to understating or downplaying my own experiences. I first taught a section of the course we describe in this paper for a couple of years, and really enjoyed how it set out to tackle the misconception of science as a "deliverer of irrefutable facts" head‐on, by focusing on the central role of deliberation. I took over as director in July 2015 and led a five‐year review of the course as described more in detail elsewhere (Öberg & Campbell, [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref75">72</reflink>]; Öberg et al., [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref76">73</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-9">THE CASE: A FIRST‐YEAR SEMINAR IN SCIENCE</hd> <p>The first‐year course, which forms the empirical basis for this paper, was introduced in 2010 and designed to challenge students' preconceived ideas of what science is and how it is done. The course teaches students to construct and deconstruct a logically coherent scientific argument supported by evidence, occasionally touching on related sociocultural issues (Birol et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref77">7</reflink>]; Fox et al., [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref78">30</reflink>]; Öberg & Campbell, [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref79">72</reflink>]; Öberg et al., [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref80">73</reflink>]). It is taught in eight parallel sections with each section consisting of an instructor, 25 students, and a teaching assistant. The small‐class format is intended to foster a safe student‐centered learning environment, as the 25 students in each section get to know each other by name and develop personal relationships among themselves as well as with their instructor and TA. The design is intended as an antidote to the stressful environment that many first‐year students reportedly experience in the large first‐year classes that often have up to 200 students. Another intentional design feature is that each department is expected to provide an instructor, preferably a professor with an active research programme. The idea behind this is to give students direct access to a "real" scientist while also showcasing a variety of active scientists across the course sections. Coherence across sections is achieved through a compendium of joint lesson plans, which provide considerable detail around course materials while still allowing and encouraging instructors to draw on their own experiences.</p> <p>During 2016−2018, efforts were made to more systematically and explicitly integrate questions about equity and diversity in the course since such questions had originally only been addressed in an ad hoc manner. For example, historic and contemporary cases were systematically selected to facilitate discussions about the importance of diversity in academia; instructors were encouraged to explicitly include discussions about gender, race, and culture in certain classes, rather than on an ad hoc basis as had previously been the case; speakers in the bi‐weekly seminar series were invited to share personal experiences related to equity, diversity, and inclusion in academia and asked to pay attention to the gender and ethnicity of students asking questions to ensure that diverse voices were heard; one of the seminars was specifically dedicated to this, including statistics about attrition and retention. The rationale and design of the course as well as the revision are described in detail elsewhere (Birol et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref81">7</reflink>]; Fox et al., [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref82">30</reflink>]; Öberg & Campbell, [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref83">72</reflink>]; Öberg et al., [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref84">73</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-10">STORY 1: INSTRUCTORS' COMFORT AND DISCOMFORT IN TEACHING ABOUT EQUITY, DIVERSITY, AND INCLUSI...</hd> <p>In addition to the lesson plans, coordination across the sections is supported through biweekly teaching team meetings, which involve 8−10 instructors, 4−5 teaching assistants, the director, and the course coordinator. Generally speaking, some instructors have taught the course several times, and others are new to the course. The purpose of these meetings, which are led by the director and the coordinator of the course, is to decompress from previous weeks, share teaching experiences, and prepare for upcoming classes. During the first meeting, which is generally held before the start of the term, the team is introduced to the format of the course and encouraged to share strategies that would support an inclusive atmosphere and motivate all students to participate. These meetings took place in a meeting room with a large square table with everyone facing one another.</p> <p>The director (the third author) employed a "round‐robin" strategy to encourage all participants to contribute at least twice; once at the beginning and once at the end. While everyone knew what position each person held, reflections and contributions were shared one‐by‐one around the table and everyone in the meeting was given explicit opportunities to contribute. Using first names amongst the team helped to break down barriers and remove any insecurities around hierarchy. The second author recalls her experience of being part of these meetings as a teaching assistant:</p> <p>As a second‐year graduate student, I was excited and nervous to be in these meetings; I had energy and enthusiasm but next‐to‐no experience teaching at the university level. The opportunity to contribute my reflections on the class, share tidbits of what the instructor and I had done in class that I thought worked well, and ideas for future improvement, made me feel seen, heard, and valued.</p> <p>The structure of these meetings, and the course structure where the teaching assistant and instructor both have opportunities to lead in‐class discussions, empowered me to engage with course content and course improvement. Particularly concerning the diversity class and other classes that referred to equity, diversity, and inclusion, the teaching assistants, including me, seemed particularly empowered— more willing to speak up in the preceding teaching team meetings and take an active role in introducing the activities in class.</p> <p>I was a teaching assistant over two semesters for three instructors. When it came to teaching the diversity class the three instructors had quite different approaches. One, an early‐career white woman was engaged and comfortable teaching the diversity class and took the lead during the class. She is a highly regarded instructor who is personable, enthusiastic, and receives high student evaluations. Her classroom is student‐centred—class discussions and active learning activities dominate. At this time, she had been teaching this course for several years. The second instructor, nearing retirement, expressed support for the diversity class but asked me to lead the class. My impression was that he did not feel he was the "right" person to lead the class discussion on diversity, though he was fully supportive of the class. The third instructor, who was teaching the course for the first time, expressed concern both to myself and to others during teaching team meetings that he felt that the class was displacing other course content. However, he respected the course structure and encouraged me to take the lead in that class. Whether he would have been comfortable leading the class, I do not know.</p> <p>I did not hesitate to say yes when two of the instructors asked me to teach the class. I was thrilled—it felt like an opportunity to take the reins and gain experience. I was excited to teach the class and I knew that giving guest lectures were an important part of a graduate student teaching portfolio. However, when I excitedly told people not affiliated with the course about this experience, they questioned why I was teaching this class—Was the instructor sick? Was I more qualified on the subject?</p> <p>Reflecting on why I was the person at the front of the classroom gave a sense of uncertainty and awkwardness and made me wonder: Why was it me? Should it have been me? Now, when a teaching assistant is asked to teach a class, it makes me wonder: are they the best person for this, or the easiest for someone to ask?</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-11">Takeaways/lessons learned</hd> <p>It is well known that women and other minorities in academia are subject to a "time tax" or "identity tax" wherein they do more service in addition to their current workloads, such as sitting on department or university committees, and are expected in particular to address minority‐related departmental and institutional affairs (Brissett, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref85">11</reflink>]; Chesler et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref86">15</reflink>]; Gewin, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref87">35</reflink>]; Guillaume & Apodaca, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref88">37</reflink>]). While the number of women in academia continues to grow, for instance, they still tend to lag behind men in terms of productivity and recognition—likely due to the burden of service, advising, and mentorship expectations that are disproportionately assigned to women and racialized faculty (Hirshfield & Joseph, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref89">48</reflink>]; Joseph & Hirshfield, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref90">56</reflink>]; Samble, [<reflink idref="bib81" id="ref91">81</reflink>]; Ward, [<reflink idref="bib100" id="ref92">100</reflink>]). Since they recognize the importance of such service and believe their presence will make a difference, this often leads to them feeling overcommitted and overburdened (Cleveland et al., [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref93">17</reflink>]; Padilla, [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref94">74</reflink>]; Wijesingha & Ramos, [<reflink idref="bib104" id="ref95">104</reflink>]). Moreover, being an effective ally is complicated for men on university campuses (Nash et al., [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref96">69</reflink>]; Patton & Bondi, [<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref97">75</reflink>]; Sue, [<reflink idref="bib91" id="ref98">91</reflink>]); "nice white men" will often dominate conversations on equity, diversity, and inclusion and use leadership positions to center themselves rather than engaging with overlooked voices. However, in this case, that did not happen. By having a teaching assistant to lean on, the men were able to remove themselves from the leadership role at the front of the classroom. While not having the two white men teach the class was a win in terms of not centering them in conversations on equity, diversity, and inclusion, removing themselves entirely from either planning, organizing, or presenting in class ultimately placed the burden on the second author, who was a teaching assistant at the time. Moreover, their disengagement may have inadvertently suggested that these discussions are a responsibility to be handled by women (and/or other minorities) and not a matter of concern for them. The "time tax" experienced by the teaching assistants not only includes the extra hours spent in meetings, but also all the preparation to become knowledgeable about equity, diversity, and inclusion and learn how to introduce these complex yet critical issues in class. Indeed, the second author had attended several workshops on campus not only because of a genuine interest in advancing her learning but also because she understood that she would be expected to engage with these subjects in class. Nevertheless, the instructors' reluctance to discuss equity, diversity, and inclusion in class ultimately provided an opportunity for the second author to gain valuable teaching experience in this complex, yet critical subject. One of the most important takeaways was that the subject matter was ultimately communicated to all students in the course, regardless of the individual instructors' interest or involvement in the topic. This was enabled by the fact that there was already a detailed lesson plan and prepared materials available ahead of time. Explicit support for the diversity class was also clearly voiced during the preceding teaching team meeting by the Dean's office as well as the instructors and TAs participating in the revision of the course. This resulted in this class being taught in each section even where the instructor was uncertain about or hesitant to teach on the topic.</p> <p>There are many tensions in balancing between providing women and people of color the opportunity to lead or direct diversity initiatives without burdening them with extra work. As faculty members suggest in a recent <emph>Nature</emph> article, using one's "hypervisibility" to secure prominent roles or contribute to institutionally valued initiatives, not being ashamed to say no to requests, dictating one's narrative with regard to equity, diversity, and inclusion, and making sure one's efforts in this area are recognized can help manage the "career consequences of cultural taxation" (Gewin, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref99">35</reflink>]). Nonetheless, it is critical to consider the differences in power between graduate students and faculty members, who may not have the same professional maneuverability, leverage, or opportunities to act on such suggestions. Having the university's explicitly stated support for these efforts ahead of time, as well as making sure to explicitly recognize and reward the efforts of those student teaching assistants or instructors who took the initiative to do equity work is one of many long‐term solutions to creating a teaching culture that is open to such discussions. We illustrate the crucial role of institutional support and involvement in equity, diversity, and inclusion in greater detail in the following story.</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-12">STORY 2: REALIZING THE IMPORTANCE OF INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT FOR EQUITY, DIVERSITY, AND INCLUSI...</hd> <p>From the beginning of the course in 2010, one of the topics of discussion during team meetings involved encouraging more quiet students to become more involved in class conversations. From 2015 onward, explicit attention is given to how gender, ethnicity, and nationality impact classroom dynamics. Attention was to be paid to both course content and how these factors might play out in the classroom. During team meetings, the instructors and TAs were encouraged to pay attention to common communication patterns that might occur in their classrooms, teach students to identify and recognize problematic styles of interaction and discuss these issues in class. As mentioned earlier, one class was specifically dedicated to discussions about equity, diversity, and inclusion in science, in line with the goals of the revision. Below, the third author recounts her memory of introducing this class to the team:</p> <p>Throughout my directorship, I led the biweekly meetings. Borrowing from my experience in problem‐based learning (Dahlgren & Oberg, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref100">21</reflink>]), I began each meeting with a "round robin" where I asked participants to spend a minute or two sharing their experiences from the course in the past 2 weeks. I generally also ended the meetings with a round‐robin to make room for team members' reflections. The idea behind this technique was to ensure that everyone has a chance to be heard and reduce the risk of a few people dominating the conversation. Generally, this approach worked well and there was, for the most part, a respectful climate in the group. Instructors commonly took up more sonic space than teaching assistants and the more experienced instructors took up more space than the less experienced ones. Even so, the structure made it so that everyone got to get their voices heard at least twice per meeting.</p> <p>In the meeting before implementing the equity, diversity, and inclusion class for the first time, I provided an overview to the team. Half of the team members had participated in the development of the class, but it was new to the rest, so I elaborated a bit on the reasoning underlying the decision to have a class dedicated to this topic. This term, in addition to myself and the coordinator, the team consisted of seven instructors, of which three were white men who were retired or close to retirement (team composition, see Table 1). When I finished the intro, these three instructors enthusiastically jumped in. I have quite a bit of experience in leading meetings, and I normally find ways to interrupt people who "hog" the space, but this time I felt unsure what to do as all three stayed on topic, their comments were constructive, and it was heartening to see them embrace the idea and engage in discussion. However, it was becoming increasingly awkward as they dominated the conversation and no one else was getting the opportunity to chime in. One of the (middle‐aged) women instructors, suddenly jumped in, saying something along the lines of "don't you find it rather interesting that the three of you are dominating this conversation?" in a friendly and inquisitive tone. A dead silence fell over the room. The person who had been talking froze with his mouth open and a puzzled look on his face. Another of the three older men leaned back and started laughing. The third turned red. It was very clear that he felt insulted and was deeply upset. I don't remember what he said. I only remember seeing his face turn the dark shade of red one associated with heart attacks. I have no clear recollection of what happened next. I guess I must have changed the topic and moved on. After the meeting, the coordinator and I asked each other, "what on earth just happened?". Shortly after, however, we forgot about it.</p> <p>1 Table Gender and ethnicity of the teaching team in a First Year Seminar for Science students</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr valign="bottom"><th align="left">Semester</th><th align="left">Instructors</th><th align="left">Teaching assistants</th></tr><tr valign="bottom"><th /><th align="left">Women (nonwhite)</th><th align="left">Men (nonwhite)</th><th align="left">Women (nonwhite)</th><th align="left">Men (nonwhite)</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Term 1</td><td align="left">3 (1)</td><td align="left">4 (1)</td><td align="left">4 (2)</td><td /></tr><tr><td align="left">Term 2</td><td align="left">2</td><td align="left">5</td><td align="left">4 (2)</td><td /></tr><tr><td align="left">Term 3</td><td align="left">4 (2)</td><td align="left">4</td><td align="left">3 (1)</td><td align="left">1 (1)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Term 4</td><td align="left">2 (1)</td><td align="left">5</td><td align="left">4 (1)</td><td /></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>The following term, the instructor team consisted of six instructors, of which three were white men who were also recently retired or close to retirement. No one in the team had taught the course the previous term so the class was new to them all. I did my spiel introducing the class on equity, diversity, and inclusion and, as on a signal, the three retired gentlemen immediately and enthusiastically jumped in. The experience from the last term must have been lingering in my memory as I, this time, did manage to somewhat moderate the discussion and create space for others, but it was very challenging since they were very unwilling to give up space. I jokingly pointed this out, which resulted in one of them bursting out in resounding laughter and another one turning a familiar dark red. There was no doubt that he was deeply insulted by me calling them out. Again, I have no recollection of what happened next. I believe I simply changed the topic, moved on, and eventually forgot about it.</p> <p>The following term, the team consisted of eight instructors. Four were men, and of the three were white and one close to retirement. All but the older instructor had taught the course during the previous year, so he was the only one not familiar with the diversity class. Upon introducing this class to the team, I was interrupted by him jumping in and going on a rant about...I do not remember about what, all I remember is that it came across as overtly misogynistic and racist. I also remember that before I knew it, another instructor (also a white man) interrupted the first speaker, calling him out. Suddenly, a shouting contest erupted between them, virtually shouting at each other across the room. I remember that I had to strain my vocal cords to get them to shut up. Everyone else in the room looked stunned. I don't remember how the meeting ended. The instructor who interrupted the newcomer stayed after the meeting and we talked through what happened. He was extremely aware that it was absurd to have two older white men engaging in a shouting contest and dominating the room while discussing a class on equity, diversity, and inclusion. He said something along the lines of, "I could not control myself, I just had to put him in place."</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-13">Takeaways/lessons learned</hd> <p>Much has been written about men, in academia and elsewhere, dominating the sonic space (Posselt, [<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref101">76</reflink>]), about men explaining things to women, even when they are more knowledgeable about the subject (Solnit et al., [<reflink idref="bib87" id="ref102">87</reflink>]) and about macro‐ and microaggressions that contribute to the suppression of women's voices (Fernandez‐Mateo & Kaplan, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref103">26</reflink>]; Kang & Kaplan, [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref104">58</reflink>]). They suggest that men speak more than women and more powerful men speak more than less powerful men. Men interrupt more and are less likely than women to cede the floor when they are interrupted (Baird, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref105">4</reflink>]). In an article in <emph>The Conversation</emph>, Sarah Kaplan points out that the actions that need to be taken to achieve change are not to change the women's behavior, but to change the men who are the perpetrators (Kaplan, [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref106">59</reflink>]):</p> <p>For those of you who fear you might be mansplainers, keep in mind—even if you are an expert, but the woman is an expert too and hasn't asked for your advice—maybe you should just stay silent. What's the harm in listening? You might learn something. Even if you speak a lot less than you do now...you still might be speaking more than the women in the room.</p> <p>She points out, however, that most mansplainers are unaware of their presumptuous behavior and that "advice on self‐restraint is bound to be ignored." In a recent review, Kang and Kaplan ([<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref107">58</reflink>]) and Applebaum ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref108">3</reflink>]) note that most equity, diversity, and inclusion strategies focus on changing attitudes even though there is little evidence that programs such as implicit bias training have an effect. On the contrary, programmes that focus exclusively on the implicit bias may even be counter‐productive—focusing only on the role of the individual and their beliefs can obscure systemic or institutional forms of discrimination (Applebaum, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref109">3</reflink>]). As well, explaining behavior as stemming from biases that people around them also unconsciously share may lead one to think, "it's okay if I am (biased) too" (Tate & Page, [<reflink idref="bib95" id="ref110">95</reflink>]). According to the studies reviewed by Kang and Kaplan ([<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref111">58</reflink>]), programmes that target behavior are more likely to be successful than those that target attitudes, and the authors urge readers to "turn our attention and resources toward structural and systemic interventions that have more promise for success." The team meetings were designed with traditional patterns in mind and focused more on behavior than attitudes, for example, by utilizing round‐robins to reduce the risk of someone dominating the sonic space. In this case, however, this approach was not entirely effective. Nor was the fact that the third author had considerable experience in leading meetings and considerable familiarity with strategies that aim at counteracting traditional group dynamics. For instance, a common piece of advice is to avoid giving interrupters free rein over the conversation and to address bad behavior directly by, for example, taking the interrupter aside and explaining why it is important to hear a broad range of viewpoints. However, it is unlikely such a strategy would have worked in these incidents where the instructors lost their temper or became angry after being publicly called out. It is well documented that the only way to achieve cultural change is for institutions to put policies, procedures, and best practices in place (Miriti, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref112">67</reflink>]). And these must be supported by the top administration. The third author was approaching the end of her term as course director and wanted to find a strategy that would not only reduce tensions around the equity, diversity, and inclusion class but integrate it, along with other diversity initiatives into the curriculum of the course in the long term. She turned to the Associate Dean of equity, diversity, and inclusion at the university for advice, who suggested they would participate in the instructor meeting before the class, outline the university's overall strategic plan and provide a description of how the course aligns with the plan. This strategy worked—since they started to join the meeting preceding the class, only constructive and civilized conversations have followed with no one overtly dominating the conversation. It appears as if the type of take‐over that happened three years in a row after deciding to introduce the class has not resurfaced.</p> <p>It seems clear that explicit institutional support is helpful, perhaps vital, when introducing structural changes related to diversity and inclusion (Miriti, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref113">67</reflink>]; Posselt, [<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref114">76</reflink>]; Weaver & Burgess, [<reflink idref="bib101" id="ref115">101</reflink>]). If we had brought in the Associate Dean from the onset of rolling out the class, it is possible that the three older men would not have taken over the meeting. It seems counterintuitive that they did so in a meeting about equity, diversity, and inclusion, but maybe it ought to have been expected. Perhaps, in trying to demonstrate their interest and involvement in such matters, the instructors in this story were so eager to contribute to the conversations that they inadvertently engaged in mansplaining (Solnit et al., [<reflink idref="bib87" id="ref116">87</reflink>]). Mansplaining is more than just a conversational inconvenience however, as Nicole Dular ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref117">23</reflink>]) points out, and is arguably a form of epistemic injustice because it involves a "dysfunctional subversion of epistemic roles of the hearer and speaker due to the operation of prejudicial identity stereotypes"—those who ought to be in the role of hearer due to their lack of knowledge and expertise about the subject of equity, diversity, and inclusion will falsely assume the role of speaker, and treat the rightful speaker as a hearer. This undermines the epistemic agency of the rightful speaker—for instance, women and/or racialized persons who are often affected gravely by a lack of equity, diversity, and inclusion in the workplace—by denying them the opportunity to give knowledge to others, but also in silencing them and forcing them into the role of the "listener," thereby suggesting they don't have something of value to add in a discussion which may likely be of greater significance to and have greater repercussions for them. The three experiences recounted in the story above occurred semester after semester and may indeed be a common phenomenon if this is so, it might be wise to start meetings that deal with sensitive topics by speaking directly about communication issues like mansplaining and how to avoid or tackle it.</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-14">STORY 3: DENORMALIZING THE NORMAL: ORGANIZING A DIVERSE SPEAKER SERIES</hd> <p>Every second week through the semester, the entire cohort of ~500 students participates in a speaker series where the speakers are encouraged to share their experience of academia. The goal of this series is to show students that scientific knowledge can be produced in many ways and teach them to articulate some of the similarities and differences in the production of research in different scientific disciplines. The intention is also to inspire students to think about their future and how they might use the knowledge they acquire during their B.Sc. To meet these goals, attention was paid from the 2010‐start to the disciplinary background of the speaker, to ensure that different faces of science were showcased (lab, field, in silico; experimental vs. observational; chemistry, physics, life sciences, computer science, etc.). In 2015, it was decided that explicit attention should also be paid to the gender and ethnicity of the speakers, striving for a speaker roster that, as far as possible, mirrored the student demographics—which was (and continues to be) one of the most international populations in North America. Recent articles in <emph>Nature</emph> and <emph>Science</emph> have similarly recommended that science departments pay special attention to the diversity of invited speakers, making sure, at the very least, they reflect the diversity of the students being trained within the department (Hagan et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref118">38</reflink>]; McCullough & Gotian, [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref119">66</reflink>]; Price, [<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref120">77</reflink>]). After further deliberation, we set a goal to have equal gender distribution among the speakers and aim to have at the very least, no more than two white speakers among the 6−7 speakers per term. Despite some initial hurdles, the introduction of an explicit diversity‐oriented approach for selecting speakers seems to have had a clear and lasting impact on their gender and ethnic distribution (Figures 1 and 2). Moreover, while it is commonly observed that policy changes require champions and that progress can often fade away when there is a change in staff, this seems not to have occurred in the case of this seminar despite a change in coordinator in 2018 and a change of director in 2019.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/SED/01jan23/sce21768-fig-0001.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="sce21768-fig-0001.jpg" title="1 Gender distribution, men (blue bars) and women (red bars) among speakers. A policy to strive for a more equitable speaker distribution was instituted in the fall of 2015." /> </p> <p></p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/SED/01jan23/sce21768-fig-0002.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="sce21768-fig-0002.jpg" title="2 Distribution among speakers into "white" (European ancestry, blue bars) and "non‐white" (persons of color, orange bars) categories. A policy to strive for a more equitable speaker distribution was instituted in the fall of 2015." /> </p> <p></p> <p>From the fall of 2016 onwards, the talk in the speaker series following the introduction of the diversity class described in Story 2 specifically looked at equity, diversity, and inclusion in academia and was delivered by someone in the senior administration to demonstrate the university's support—such as the President of the university, the Dean of the Faculty of Science, or the Associate Dean of equity and diversity. On one occasion, the original speaker could not attend, and someone else had to fill in for them on short notice. The third author shares her memory of this incident:</p> <p>The speaker, a white man in his 50s, introduced himself and made some general jokes to get the audience to relax. He used the PowerPoint presentation that had been prepared by the original speaker, which, for example, showed the relative distribution of men and women at the undergraduate level, graduate level, post‐doc, assistant professors etc. Eager to follow the instructions, the speaker enthusiastically shared stories from his graduate studies and early research career. He mentioned that it often included working weekends and evenings, that he travelled a lot, and that he had little time for anything else. This was delivered as something he was proud over. In passing, he mentioned being married, and not having much time for his children and somewhere along the line he also mentioned that his wife and he met in grad school but that she had chosen to stay home with the children instead of committing to an academic career. I don't remember exactly what he said, but I remember that he seemed to catch himself, thinking that perhaps that was not a wise thing to say, so he made a joke about his wife staying at home with the kids that to my mind came across as even more sexist than his story. I was embarrassed and angry, but I didn't feel that it would be appropriate or constructive to call him out in front of the close to 500 students in the audience. His comment or attitude was not in any way extreme. Rather it was a rather typical presentation by a certain type of man. The type of side‐comments that commonly are seen as funny by at least some in most audiences. Based on my prior experience, I thought that questioning the inappropriateness of his comment or attitude would be met by a shrug, perhaps a raised eyebrow, or explicitly being told that I am oversensitive and see sexism everywhere. Not so this time. A couple of the instructors contacted me directly after the talk. They were quite upset and questioned why I just let it pass. The round robin that started the bi‐weekly meeting that followed, revealed that either instructors, the teaching assistant, or students in the class, had brought up the talk and his comment in class, followed by lively and constructive discussions. I promised the team that I would report the incident, which I did, and my understanding is that it led to a serious conversation between the Dean and the speaker.</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-17">Takeaways/lessons learned</hd> <p>Invited speakers are a crucial and potentially easily actionable arena for equity, diversity, and inclusion efforts in a science department; they provide students with a wide range of scientific role models and increase their sense of belonging in STEM disciplines while institutions work towards a more comprehensive inclusive policy. However, as Termini and Pang ([<reflink idref="bib96" id="ref121">96</reflink>]) have suggested, diversity within the invited speaker pool is often limited; women and minorities tend to be extremely underrepresented at this level. A study examining diversity in the University of Michigan Department of Microbiology and Immunology seminar series, for instance, found that despite the growing diversity of graduate students in the department, only 8.5% of invited speakers identified as historically underrepresented minorities (Hagan et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref122">39</reflink>]). Meanwhile, Gerull et al. ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref123">34</reflink>]), Shishkova et al. ([<reflink idref="bib85" id="ref124">85</reflink>]), Sardelis and Drew ([<reflink idref="bib82" id="ref125">82</reflink>]), Schroeder et al. ([<reflink idref="bib83" id="ref126">83</reflink>]), and Simon et al. ([<reflink idref="bib86" id="ref127">86</reflink>]) have all found that women were far less likely than men to be invited as keynote or plenary speakers to STEM conferences and seminars. In response to these issues, recent publications have recommended using databases of diverse scientists such as "500 Women Scientists," "Editors of Color," and "Diversify Chemistry" while organizing the departmental speaker series (Hagan et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref128">38</reflink>]; McCullough & Gotian, [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref129">66</reflink>]; Price, [<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref130">77</reflink>]). What stands out most in the story, however, are the troubles that crop up when even the best‐laid plans fall to the wayside; despite the instructors and course directors' intentions for the speaker roster before the seminar series, knowing how to handle a problematic speaker at the moment or even recruiting suitably diverse speakers in the first place can be quite challenging in practice. Seemingly mundane or trivial incidents can have wide‐ranging and unexpected effects on the culture of a department, specifically because they are so slippery and pervasive. By taking the daily norms and communication patterns within our educational settings seriously as the micro‐foundations of larger structural arrangements, we can make the normal "visible" and open it up to both questioning and change (Posselt, [<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref131">76</reflink>]; Solorzano et al., [<reflink idref="bib88" id="ref132">88</reflink>]; Sue et al., [<reflink idref="bib92" id="ref133">92</reflink>]). This can be done, as shown in the second part of this story, by immediately reporting such incidents to the university administration and discussing it with students in an open, transparent, and constructive manner. Indeed, in some instances, Sue and others suggest, it may be most effective to seek external support from institutional authorities, particularly when there is an unequal power dynamic between the perpetrator(s) of the microaggression and its target(s) (as well as allies and bystanders), it is personally and/or professionally risky or challenging to become involved directly, and if institutional changes should be implemented to combat the incident (Brondolo et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref134">12</reflink>]; Sue, [<reflink idref="bib91" id="ref135">91</reflink>]). Active and effective responses to "hot button" issues in the classroom (like racism or sexism or other similar forms of discrimination) include a clear recognition and diagnosis of the nature and focus of the conflict. By listening to the voices of students who were involved or privy to the incident, the instructors were able to address and "de‐normalize" the existence of racial and gendered issues in science and link it to the broader context of a racially inequitable and contentious society and educational system (Chesler et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref136">15</reflink>]). Moreover, this incident also shows the value of taking a student‐centered approach to discussing equity, diversity, and inclusion, where they delve into complicated issues in class, and the instructor mainly plays the role of a facilitator. Initiating exchanges and problem‐solving among students can help instructors to continue balancing control of a potentially difficult situation while maintaining a commitment to student learning from and about such situations (Chesler et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref137">15</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-18">CONCLUDING REMARKS</hd> <p>This study emerges from the second and third authors' involvement in introducing equity, diversity, and inclusion‐related initiatives in a first‐year science seminar at a Canadian university. It discusses three instances where they were faced with hurdles or obstacles in introducing these issues in the course. We chose this format to illustrate just how unpredictable and complex day‐to‐day dealings with such issues can be, particularly when they take the form of subtler microaggressions rather than clear‐cut cases of discrimination or harassment.</p> <p>The first story looked at the second author's experience as a teaching assistant having to prepare for and teach a class on equity, diversity, and inclusion with minimal help or support from the men on the teaching team. It considers this story through a lens of "taxation"; these subjects are often seen to be a "minority" issue to be handled by minority faculty and students (Hirshfield & Joseph, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref138">48</reflink>]; Joseph & Hirshfield, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref139">56</reflink>]). Preparing teaching materials and lesson plans ahead of time proved to be effective in ensuring that the class on equity, diversity, and inclusion in science went on as planned despite the significant variation in individual instructors' experiences or comfort with teaching about it. They can also serve as a useful template and resource to work with and build on as instructors, directors, and teaching assistants for the course change over time. Most importantly, explicit institutional support for organizing and dispensing equity material in science teaching environments was found to help ensure that all instructors were aware ahead of time that they would be expected to teach about it during the course. While in this case, some of the instructors off‐loaded that work onto the second author, perhaps reiterating institutional support for and expectations to teach about equity in the context of science as well as building in multiple opportunities for those students and faculty doing equity work to be explicitly recognized and credited for their efforts can help to moderate expectations that marginalized people will always act as diversity poster children (Ahmed, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref140">1</reflink>]; June, [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref141">57</reflink>]; Nash et al., [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref142">69</reflink>]). As Hunter ([<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref143">51</reflink>]) and Ahmed and Swan ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref144">2</reflink>]) point out, asking them to continually act as caretakers for diversity without sufficient reward for their efforts is one‐way minorities are continually repositioned as outsiders within the university—it is crucial to iterate and reiterate that such work will not stay "invisible" or unnoticed.</p> <p>In the second story, which reiterates the importance of explicit institutional support and intervention from the university, the third author found that certain instructors monopolized or derailed the discussions despite her best attempts at moderating the meetings, sometimes even questioning the need for such a class altogether. However, this was quickly mitigated when she invited the Associate Dean of equity, diversity, and inclusion to the meeting. Having someone from the highest level of the university administration literally "be present" in the teaching team meeting, encouraging the development of such a class for the course and outlining how it falls in line with the university's strategic plan was an effective way to temper any outbursts from individual instructors. It was made clear that the equity class would not be "optional" or "negotiable," and the individual instructors also refrained from "mansplaining" as they had earlier. Continuing to do this in the following semesters would also be an effective way to enable a longer‐term cultural change within the sciences by building diversity into all levels of a major public research university's bureaucracy (Henry, Dua, et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref145">46</reflink>]; Miriti, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref146">67</reflink>]; Posselt, [<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref147">76</reflink>]).</p> <p>The third story looks at the process of creating a diverse speaker series for the course and how institutionalizing this expectation in science departments can lead to longer‐lasting cultural changes. This can be achieved by using a roster of "women speakers" or "speakers of color" which are easily available online, explicitly asking for minority speakers when soliciting suggestions, or setting limits to how many speakers can be white and/or men in order ahead of time to ensure that they aren't inadvertently selected or become the "default" when there are challenges in finding diverse speakers. While unexpected troubles relating to speakers are unavoidable, we suggest that an open and transparent classroom atmosphere allows students and instructors to comfortably have dialogues about even those incidents which lurk in the murky area between acceptable and unacceptable behavior. Even though the third author, in her role as director, did not call out the problematic speaker because her former experiences suggested it would not be constructive, the course instructors discussed the incident during the next class of their own volition or prompted by teaching assistants or students, and acted as facilitators while allowing students to ask questions about it and air out their grievances. This is an encouraging sign; a classroom culture that welcomes discussions about complex and sensitive subjects and acknowledges the existence of structural inequities in the sciences will likely foster a better, more well‐rounded student learning (Chesler et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref148">15</reflink>]).</p> <p>Together, these stories demonstrate the messiness of introducing and maintaining university course content that speaks to issues of equity, diversity, and inclusion in science. We have tried to show that doing this effectively requires both in‐the‐moment responses and explicit institutional support over the short, medium, and long‐term. However, there are no easy solutions that are bound to withstand ever‐changing leadership in academia, as anyone who has ever engaged in equity work would likely know. Indeed, a thread that runs through all three stories is the pressing need for and the challenges associated with creating a more permanent institutional memory for diversity initiatives that will outlive those who initiated and, for a time, organized them. Simply put, how do you ensure that what you are doing now will be carried on by the faculty members, students, and staff who succeed you—how does it become part of the cultural fabric of a science department instead of just a one‐off occurrence? Ahmed ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref149">1</reflink>]), and Bell and Hartmann ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref150">6</reflink>]) have rightly warned that previous diversity efforts in universities have often been superficial, taking the form of "happy talk" or "mission statement talk," rather than sustained programmatic efforts to address the continued problems and perceptions of minorities. However, on a happier note, Tamtik and Guenter's ([<reflink idref="bib94" id="ref151">94</reflink>]) more recent findings suggest that equity, diversity and inclusion activities have become (and continue to increasingly be) a policy priority in most Canadian universities. They note an increase in institutional strategic activities, including political commitments (e.g., new equity offices, new senior administration positions, mandatory training), student and faculty recruitment with programmatic and research supports (e.g., diversity admission policies, scholarships, access programmes, curriculum changes), accompanied by broader efforts to create supportive institutional climates across Canada. Given the increasingly strident calls for greater equity, diversity, and inclusion in science following the pandemic and the Black Lives Matter Movement in 2020, as well as our university's public initiation of a new "Inclusion Action Plan" in May 2021, perhaps these are encouraging signs that higher education institutions are becoming much more willing to directly support diversity initiatives at all levels of the university.</p> <hd id="AN0160719088-19">DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT</hd> <p>The data used in this study are not publicly available as they contain potentially identifying information.</p> <ref id="AN0160719088-20"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref140" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Aishwarya Ramachandran and Isobel C. Mouat contributed equally to this study.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0160719088-21"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibtext> Ahmed, S. (2012). On being included: Racism and diversity in institutional life. Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822395324</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref144" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Ahmed, S., & Swan, E. (2006). Doing diversity. Policy Futures in Education, 4 (2), 96 – 100. https://doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2006.4.2.96</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref108" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Applebaum, B. (2019). Remediating campus climate: Implicit bias training is not enough. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 38 (2), 129 – 141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-018-9644-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref105" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Baird, J. (2016, April 20). Opinion | How to explain mansplaining. The New York Times. https://<ulink href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/21/opinion/how-to-explain-mansplaining.html">www.nytimes.com/2016/04/21/opinion/how-to-explain-mansplaining.html</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref16" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Barber, P. H., Hayes, T. B., Johnson, T. L., & Márquez‐Magaña, L. (2020). Systemic racism in higher education. Science, 369 (6510), 1440 – 1441. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abd7140</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref150" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Bell, J. M., & Hartmann, D. (2007). Diversity in everyday discourse: The cultural ambiguities and consequences of "happy talk". American Sociological Review, 72 (6), 895 – 914. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240707200603</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref77" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Birol, G., Han, A., Welsh, A., & Fox, J. (2013). Impact of a first‐year seminar in science on student writing and argumentation. Journal of College Science Teaching, 43 (1), 82 – 91.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref31" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Blair, E. E., Miller, R. B., Ong, M., & Zastavker, Y. V. (2017). Undergraduate STEM instructors' teacher identities and discourses on student gender expression and equity. Journal of Engineering Education, 106 (1), 14 – 43. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20157</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref17" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Blithe, S. J., & Elliott, M. (2020). Gender inequality in the academy: Microaggressions, work−life conflict, and academic rank. Journal of Gender Studies, 29 (7), 751 – 764. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2019.1657004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Braileanu, M., Edney, E., Azar, S., Lazarow, F., Mogensen, M. A., Tuburan, S., Kadom, N., & Phalke, V. (2021). Radiology, sexual harassment, and the #MeToo movement. Academic Radiology, 28 (4), 564 – 571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2020.04.036</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brissett, N. (2020). Inequitable rewards: experiences of faculty of color mentoring students of color. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 28 (5), 556 – 577. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2020.1859327</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brondolo, E., Brady ver Halen, N., Pencille, M., Beatty, D., & Contrada, R. J. (2009). Coping with racism: A selective review of the literature and a theoretical and methodological critique. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 32 (1), 64 – 88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-008-9193-0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bryant, L., & Bryant, K. (2018). Memory work. In P. Liamputtong (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in health social sciences (pp. 1 – 14). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2779-6_88-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cartier, K. (2020). Geoscience commits to racial justice. Now we've got work to do. Eos. https://eos.org/articles/geoscience-commits-to-racial-justice-now-weve-got-work-to-do</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chesler, M. A., & Young, A. A. (2012). Faculty identities and the challenge of diversity. Paradigm Publishers.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clandinin, D. J. (2007). Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a methodology. Sage Publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cleveland, D. R., Sailes, D. J., Gilliam, D. E., & Watts, J. (2018). A theoretical focus on cultural taxation: Who pays for it in higher education. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 5 (10), 95 – 98. https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.510.5293</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1990). Stories of experience and narrative inquiry. Educational Researcher, 19 (5), 2 – 14. https://doi.org/10.2307/1176100</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed). SAGE Publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Daalen, K. R., van, Bajnoczki, C., Chowdhury, M., Dada, S., Khorsand, P., Socha, A., Lal, A., Jung, L., Alqodmani, L., Torres, I., Ouedraogo, S., Mahmud, A. J., Dhatt, R., Phelan, A., & Rajan, D. (2020). Symptoms of a broken system: The gender gaps in COVID‐19 decision‐making. BMJ Global Health, 5 (10), e003549. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003549</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dahlgren, M., & Oberg, G. (2001). Questioning to learn and learning to question: Structure and function of problem‐based learning scenarios in environmental science education. Higher Education, 41 (3), 263 – 282. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004138810465</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Douglas, H. (2009). Science, policy, and the value‐free ideal. University of Pittsburgh Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt6wrc78</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dular, N. (2021). Mansplaining as epistemic injustice. Feminist Philosophy Quarterly, 7 (1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.5206/fpq/2021.1.8482</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Duranczyk, I. M., Higbee, J. L., & Lundell, D. B. (Eds.). (2004). Best practices for access and retention in higher education. Center for Research on Developmental Education and Urban Literacy (CRDEUL), University of Minnesota.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Elliott, K. C. (2017). A tapestry of values : An introduction to values in science. Oxford University Press. https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190260804.001.0001/acprof-9780190260804</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fernandez‐Mateo, I., & Kaplan, S. (2018). Gender and organization science: Introduction to a virtual special issue. Organization Science, 29 (6), 1229 – 1236. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2018.1249</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Flaherty, C. (2021). Where and how gender and caregiving intersect for professors during COVID‐19. https://<ulink href="http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/03/31/where-and-how-gender-and-caregiving-intersect-professors-during-covid-19">www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/03/31/where-and-how-gender-and-caregiving-intersect-professors-during-covid-19</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ford, K. A. (2011). Race, gender, and bodily (mis)recognitions: Women of color faculty experiences with White students in the college classroom. The Journal of Higher Education, 82 (4), 444 – 478.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Forrester, N. (2020). Diversity in science: Next steps for research group leaders. Nature, 585 (7826), S65 – S67. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02681-y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fox, J., Birol, G., Han, A., Cassidy, A., Welsh, A., Nakonechny, J., Berger, J., Peacock, S., & Samuels, L. (2014). 2013 Alan Blizzard Award Feature Article—Enriching educational experiences through UBC's first year seminar in science (SCIE113). Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 7 (1), 1. https://doi.org/10.22329/celt.v7i1.4147</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press Incorporated. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=694009</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Friedlaender, C. (2018). On microaggressions: Cumulative harm and individual responsibility. Hypatia, 33 (1), 5 – 21. https://doi.org/10.1111/hypa.12390</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gannon, S., & Davies, B. (2021). Doing collective biography through theoretical, material, affective, embodies assemblages. In R. Hamm (Ed.), Reader Collective Memory‐Work (pp. 540 – 570). Beltra Books. https://<ulink href="http://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/bitstream/handle/document/75698/ssoar-2021-hamm-Reader%5fCollective%5fMemory-Work.pdf?sequence=1%26isAllowed=y%26lnkname=ssoar-2021-hamm-Reader%5fCollective%5fMemory-Work.pdf">www.ssoar.info/ssoar/bitstream/handle/document/75698/ssoar-2021-hamm-Reader%5fCollective%5fMemory-Work.pdf?sequence=1%26isAllowed=y%26lnkname=ssoar-2021-hamm-Reader%5fCollective%5fMemory-Work.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gerull, K. M., Kim, D. J., Cogsil, T., Rhea, L., & Cipriano, C. (2020). Are women proportionately represented as speakers at orthopaedic surgery annual meetings? A cross‐sectional analysis. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 478 (12), 2729 – 2740. https://doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000001359</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gewin, V. (2020). The time tax put on scientists of colour. Nature, 583 (7816), 479 – 481. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01920-6</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Goltz, S. M., & Sotirin, P. (2014). From academics to change agents in a gender equity initiative. Organization Management Journal, 11 (3), 194 – 207. https://doi.org/10.1080/15416518.2014.947531</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guillaume, R. O., & Apodaca, E. C. (2020). Early career faculty of color and promotion and tenure: The intersection of advancement in the academy and cultural taxation. Race Ethnicity and Education, 25 (4), 1 – 18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2020.1718084</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hagan, A. K., Pollet, R. M., & Libertucci, J. (2019). Policy should change to improve invited speaker diversity and reflect trainee diversity. BioRxiv, 785717. https://doi.org/10.1101/785717</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hagan, A. K., Pollet, R. M., & Libertucci, J. (2020). Suggestions for improving invited speaker diversity to reflect trainee diversity. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 21 (1), 1 –9. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v21i1.2105</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ham, B. (2020). AAAS drafts plans to combat systemic racism in sciences | American Association for the Advancement of Science. https://<ulink href="http://www.aaas.org/news/aaas-drafts-plans-combat-systemic-racism-sciences">www.aaas.org/news/aaas-drafts-plans-combat-systemic-racism-sciences</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14 (3), 575 – 599. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harding, S. (1997). Women's standpoints on nature: What makes them possible? Osiris, 12, 186 – 200.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harper, S. R., & Hurtado, S. (2007). Nine themes in campus racial climates and implications for institutional transformation. New Directions for Student Services, 2007 (120), 7 – 24. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.254</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harrison, C., & Tanner, K. D. (2018). Language matters: Considering microaggressions in science. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 17 (1), fe4. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.18-01-0011</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Haug, F. (1986). Female sexualization: A collective work of memory. Verso.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Henry, F., Dua, E., Kobayashi, A., James, C., Li, P., Ramos, H., & Smith, M. S. (2017). Race, racialization and indigeneity in Canadian universities. Race Ethnicity and Education, 20 (3), 300 – 314. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2016.1260226</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Henry, F., Dua, E., James, C. E., Kobayashi, A., Li, P., Ramos, H., & Smith, M. S. (2017). The equity myth: Racialization and indigeneity at Canadian universities. University of British Columbia Press. UBC Press</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hirshfield, L. E., & Joseph, T. D. (2012). 'We need a woman, we need a black woman': Gender, race, and identity taxation in the academy. Gender and Education, 24 (2), 213 – 227. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2011.606208</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hollingsworth, S. (1992). Learning to teach through collaborative conversation: A feminist approach. American Educational Research Journal, 29 (2), 373 – 404. https://doi.org/10.2307/1163373</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hollingsworth, S., Dybdahl, M., & Minarik, L. T. (1993). By chart and chance and passion: The importance of relational knowing in learning to teach. Curriculum Inquiry, 23 (1), 5 – 35. https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.1993.11076103</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hunter, S. (2006). Working for equality and diversity in adult and community learning: leadership, representation and racialised 'outsiders within'. Policy Futures in Education, 4 (2), 114 – 127. https://doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2006.4.2.114</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jansson, M., Wendt, M., & Åse, C. (2008). Memory work reconsidered. NORA—Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research, 16 (4), 228 – 240. https://doi.org/10.1080/08038740802441048</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jayakumar, U. M., Howard, T. C., Allen, W. R., & Han, J. C. (2009). Racial privilege in the professoriate: An exploration of campus climate, retention, and satisfaction. The Journal of Higher Education, 80 (5), 538 – 563. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2009.11779031</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> JEM Editorial Team. (2020). Gender disparity in scientific publishing: What can we do. Journal of Experimental Medicine, 217, e20200291. https://doi.org/10.1084/jem.20200291</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Johnson, A. C. (2007). Unintended consequences: How science professors discourage women of color. Science Education, 91 (5), 805 – 821. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20208</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Joseph, T. D., & Hirshfield, L. E. (2011). 'Why don't you get somebody new to do it?' Race and cultural taxation in the academy. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 34 (1), 121 – 141. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2010.496489</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> June, A. W. (2015, November 9). The invisible labor of minority professors. The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://<ulink href="http://www.chronicle.com/article/the-invisible-labor-of-minority-professors/">www.chronicle.com/article/the-invisible-labor-of-minority-professors/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kang, S. K., & Kaplan, S. (2019). Working toward gender diversity and inclusion in medicine: Myths and solutions. The Lancet, 393 (10171), 579 – 586. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33138-6</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kaplan, S. (2019). Mansplaining: New solutions to a tiresome old problem. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/mansplaining-new-solutions-to-a-tiresome-old-problem-120400</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Keller, E. F. (1982). Feminism and science. Signs, 7 (3), 589 – 602.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kidd, I. J., Medina, J., & Pohlhaus, G. (2017). The Routledge handbook of epistemic injustice (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315212043</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kobayashi, A. (2003). GPC ten years on: Is self‐reflexivity enough? Gender, Place & Culture, 10 (4), 345 – 349. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369032000153313</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kotzee, B. (2017). Education and epistemic injustice. In I. Kidd, J. Medina, & G. Pohlhaus (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of epistemic injustice (1st ed.). (pp. 324 – 335). Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Levy, R., & Mattsson, M. (2020). The effects of social movements: Evidence from #MeToo (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 3496903). Social Science Research Network. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3496903</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Longino, H. E. (1990). Feminism and philosophy of science. Journal of Social Philosophy, 21 (2–3), 150 – 159. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9833.1990.tb00287.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McCullough, D., & Gotian, R. (2020). Five tips for boosting diversity on campus. Nature, 584 (7822), 654 – 655. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02367-5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Miriti, M. N. (2020). The elephant in the room: Race and STEM diversity. BioScience, 70 (3), 237 – 242. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biz167</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Morton, T. R., & Parsons, E. C. (2018). BlackGirlMagic: The identity conceptualization of Black women in undergraduate STEM education. Science Education, 102 (6), 1363 – 1393. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21477</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nash, M., Grant, R., Moore, R., & Winzenberg, T. (2021). Male allyship in institutional STEMM gender equity initiatives. PLoS ONE, 16 (3), e0248373. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248373</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Neill, U. S. (2017a, August). Harassment and sexism in science—The e‐mail diaries. Scientific American Blog Network. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/harassment-and-sexism-in-science-mdash-the-e-mail-diaries/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Neill, U. S. (2017b, October). When scientists say, "me, too." Scientific American Blog Network. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/when-scientists-say-me-too/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Öberg, G., & Campbell, A. (2019). Navigating the divide between scientific practice and science studies to support undergraduate teaching of epistemic knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 41 (2), 230 – 247. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1548044</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Öberg, G., Campbell, A., Fox, J., Graves, M., Ivanochko, T., Matsuchi, L., Mouat, I. C., & Welsh, A. (2021). Teaching science as a process, not a set of facts. Science & Education, 31, 787 – 817. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00253-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Padilla, A. M. (1994). Ethnic minority scholars, research, and mentoring: Current and future issues. Educational Researcher, 23 (4), 24 – 27. https://doi.org/10.2307/1176259</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Patton, L. D., & Bondi, S. (2015). Nice white men or social justice allies?: Using critical race theory to examine how white male faculty and administrators engage in ally work. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 18 (4), 488 – 514. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2014.1000289</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Posselt, J. R. (2020). Equity in science: Representation, culture, and the dynamics of change in graduate education. Stanford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Price, M. (2019, November 5). Departmental seminar speakers should better reflect trainee diversity. Science | AAAS. https://<ulink href="http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2019/11/departmental-seminar-speakers-should-better-reflect-trainee-diversity">www.sciencemag.org/careers/2019/11/departmental-seminar-speakers-should-better-reflect-trainee-diversity</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rodriguez, A. J., Ciftci, A., Howell, K., Kokini, K., Wright, B., & Nikalje, A. (2021). Promoting equity, diversity and social justice through faculty‐led transformative projects. Innovative Higher Education, 47, 201 – 222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-021-09560-y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rodríguez Mega, E. (2019). 'I was dying of shame': Mexican science faces its #MeToo moment. https://<ulink href="http://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01376-3">www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01376-3</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rose, G. (1997). Situating knowledges: Positionality, reflexivities and other tactics. Progress in Human Geography, 21 (3), 305 – 320. https://doi.org/10.1191/030913297673302122</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Samble, J. N. (2008). Female faculty: Challenges and choices in the United States and beyond. New Directions for Higher Education, 2008, 55 – 62. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.313</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sardelis, S., & Drew, J. A. (2016). Not "pulling up the ladder": Women who organize conference symposia provide greater opportunities for women to speak at conservation conferences. PLoS ONE, 11 (7), e0160015. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160015</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schroeder, J., Dugdale, H. L., Radersma, R., Hinsch, M., Buehler, D. M., Saul, J., Porter, L., Liker, A., De Cauwer, I., Johnson, P. J., Santure, A. W., Griffin, A. S., Bolund, E., Ross, L., Webb, T. J., Feulner, P. G., Winney, I., Szulkin, M., Komdeur, J., ... Horrocks, N. P. (2013). Fewer invited talks by women in evolutionary biology symposia. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 26 (9), 2063 – 2069. https://doi.org/10.1111/jeb.12198</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. (1997). Talking about leaving. Westview Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shishkova, E., Kwiecien, N. W., Hebert, A. S., Westphall, M. S., Prenni, J. E., & Coon, J. J. (2017). Gender diversity in a STEM subfield—Analysis of a large scientific society and its annual conferences. Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 28 (12), 2523 – 2531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13361-017-1803-z</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Simon, J. L., Morris, E. K., & Smith, N. G. (2007). Trends in women's participation at the meetings of the Association for Behavior Analysis: 1975–2005. The Behavior Analyst, 30 (2), 181 – 196. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392154</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Solnit, R., & Fernandez, A. T. (2014). Men explain things to me. Haymarket Books.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Solorzano, D., Ceja, M., & Yosso, T. (2000). Critical race theory, racial microaggressions, and campus racial climate: The experiences of African American college students. The Journal of Negro Education, 69 (1/2), 60 – 73.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Spicer, A., & Levay, C. (2012). Critical theories of organizational change. In D. Boje, B. Burnes, & J. Hassard (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Organizational Change (pp. 276 – 290) Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stephenson, N., & Kippax, S. (2008). Memory work. In C. Willig & W. Stainton‐Rogers (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research in psychology (pp. 127 – 146). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848607927.n8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sue, D. W. (2019). Disarming racial microaggressions: Microintervention strategies for targets, White allies, and bystanders. American Psychologist, 74 (1), 128 – 142. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000296</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sue, D. W., Capodilupo, C. M., Torino, G. C., Bucceri, J. M., Holder, A. M. B., Nadal, K. L., & Esquilin, M. (2007). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for clinical practice. American Psychologist, 62 (4), 271 – 286. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.62.4.271</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sue, D. W., Nadal, K. L., Capodilupo, C. M., Lin, A. I., Torino, G. C., & Rivera, D. P. (2008). Racial microaggressions against black Americans: Implications for counseling. Journal of Counseling & Development, 86 (3), 330 – 338. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6678.2008.tb00517.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tamtik, M., & Guenter, M. (2019). Policy analysis of equity, diversity and inclusion strategies in Canadian universities—How far have we come? The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 49 (3), 41 – 56.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tate, S. A., & Page, D. (2018). Whiteliness and institutional racism: Hiding behind (un)conscious bias. Ethics and Education, 13 (1), 141 – 155. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449642.2018.1428718</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Termini, C. M., & Pang, A. (2020). Beyond the bench: How inclusion and exclusion make us the scientists we are. Molecular Biology of the Cell, 31 (20), 2164 – 2167. https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.E20-06-0374</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tilghman, S., Alberts, B., Colón‐Ramos, D., Dzirasa, K., Kimble, J., & Varmus, H. (2021). Concrete steps to diversify the scientific workforce. Science, 372 (6538), 133 – 135. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abf9679</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tuana, N. (2017). The subject of knowledge. In I. Kidd, J. Medina, & G. Pohlhaus (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Epistemic Injustice (pp. 125 – 138). Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Turner, C. S. V., González, J. C., & Wong (Lau), K. (2011). Faculty women of color: The critical nexus of race and gender. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 4 (4), 199 – 211. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024630</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ward, L. (2008). Female faculty in male‐dominated fields: Law, medicine, and engineering. New Directions for Higher Education, 2008 (143), 63 – 72. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.314</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Weaver, G., & Burgess, W. (2015). Transforming institutions. Purdue University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wibeck, V., Dahlgren, M. A., & Öberg, G. (2007). Learning in focus groups: An analytical dimension for enhancing focus group research. Qualitative Research: QR, 7 (2), 249 – 267. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794107076023</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wigginton, N. S., Cunningham, R. M., Katz, R. H., Lidstrom, M. E., Moler, K. A., Wirtz, D., & Zuber, M. T. (2020). Moving academic research forward during COVID‐19. Science, 368 (6496), 1190 – 1192. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abc5599</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wijesingha, R., & Ramos, H. (2017). Human capital or cultural taxation: What accounts for differences in tenure and promotion of racialized and female faculty? Canadian Journal of Higher Education (1975), 47 (3), 54 – 75.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wofford, A. M., & Blaney, J. M. (2021). (Re)shaping the socialization of scientific labs: Understanding women's doctoral experiences in STEM lab rotations. The Review of Higher Education, 44 (3), 357 – 386. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2021.0001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wylie, A. (2003). Why standpoint matters. In R. Figueroa & S. G. Harding (Eds.), Science and other cultures: Issues in philosophies of science and technology (pp. 26 – 48). Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yancy, C. W. (2020). Academic medicine and Black Lives Matter: Time for deep listening. Journal of the American Medical Association, 324 (5), 435 – 436. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.12532</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Young, K., Anderson, M., & Stewart, S. (2015). Hierarchical microaggressions in higher education. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 8 (1), 61 – 71. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038464</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zimmer, K. (2020). Gender gap in research output widens during pandemic. The Scientist Magazine ®. https://<ulink href="http://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/gender-gap-in-research-output-widens-during-pandemic-67665">www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/gender-gap-in-research-output-widens-during-pandemic-67665</ulink></bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Aishwarya Ramachandran; Isobel C. Mouat and Gunilla Öberg</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib103" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib109" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib99" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib108" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib107" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib106" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib98" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib97" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib84" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib89" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib76" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib92" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib93" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib88" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib105" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib78" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib90" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib80" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib73" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib102" firstref="ref74"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref78"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref86"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref87"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl66" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref88"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl67" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl68" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref90"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl69" bibid="bib81" firstref="ref91"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl70" bibid="bib100" firstref="ref92"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl71" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref93"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl72" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref94"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl73" bibid="bib104" firstref="ref95"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl74" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref96"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl75" bibid="bib75" firstref="ref97"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl76" bibid="bib91" firstref="ref98"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl77" bibid="bib87" firstref="ref102"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl78" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref103"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl79" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref104"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl80" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref106"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl81" bibid="bib95" firstref="ref110"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl82" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref112"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl83" bibid="bib101" firstref="ref115"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl84" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref117"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl85" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref118"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl86" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref119"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl87" bibid="bib77" firstref="ref120"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl88" bibid="bib96" firstref="ref121"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl89" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref122"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl90" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref123"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl91" bibid="bib85" firstref="ref124"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl92" bibid="bib82" firstref="ref125"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl93" bibid="bib83" firstref="ref126"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl94" bibid="bib86" firstref="ref127"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl95" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref134"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl96" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref141"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl97" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref143"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl98" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref145"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl99" bibid="bib94" firstref="ref151"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1358273
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Incorporating Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Science: Lessons Learned from an Undergraduate Seminar
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ramachandran%2C+Aishwarya%22">Ramachandran, Aishwarya</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1590-741X">0000-0002-1590-741X</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Mouat%2C+Isobel+C%2E%22">Mouat, Isobel C.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Öberg%2C+Gunilla%22">Öberg, Gunilla</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Science+Education%22"><i>Science Education</i></searchLink>. Jan 2023 107(1):180-202.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 23
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2023
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Science+Instruction%22">Science Instruction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Equal+Education%22">Equal Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Inclusion%22">Inclusion</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Diversity%22">Diversity</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Barriers%22">Barriers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Methods%22">Teaching Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22COVID-19%22">COVID-19</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Pandemics%22">Pandemics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Racism%22">Racism</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Faculty%22">College Faculty</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Role%22">Teacher Role</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Undergraduate+Students%22">Undergraduate Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Experience%22">Teaching Experience</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Aggression%22">Aggression</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Student+Relationship%22">Teacher Student Relationship</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1002/sce.21768
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0036-8326<br />1098-237X
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Questions of equity, diversity, and inclusion in the sciences have taken center stage in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and Black Lives Matter movement of 2020. This paper focuses on the experiences of academics engaging in such work, particularly in their roles as educators, by sharing two of the authors' experiences introducing equity, diversity, and inclusion initiatives in a first-year science course at a Canadian university. Using critical research methodologies like narrative inquiry and memory work, we look at three separate instances where complex personal, institutional and course attributes fostered, allowed, or hindered efforts to bring these initiatives into the classroom. We consider how problematic incidents and obstacles relating to the organization of content on equity, diversity, and inclusion in science cropped up during the process, how they were perceived and handled in the moment, as well as the authors' reflections, takeaways, and lessons learned from the experience. These stories suggest that efforts to center discussions about equity, diversity, and inclusion in undergraduate science classrooms can be unpredictable and complex, particularly at the day-to-day level; this is especially the case when handling subtler microaggressions rather than clear instances of discrimination or harassment. Our study points to the importance of creating a more permanent institutional memory for initiatives that outlive those who initiated and organized them, so that they become embedded within the culture of a course or department.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2022
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1358273
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1358273
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1002/sce.21768
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 23
        StartPage: 180
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Science Instruction
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Equal Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Inclusion
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Diversity
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Barriers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching Methods
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: COVID-19
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Pandemics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Racism
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: College Faculty
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Role
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Undergraduate Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching Experience
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Aggression
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Student Relationship
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Incorporating Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Science: Lessons Learned from an Undergraduate Seminar
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ramachandran, Aishwarya
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Mouat, Isobel C.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Öberg, Gunilla
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2023
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0036-8326
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1098-237X
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 107
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Science Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1