A holistic understanding of inclusion in STEM

Systemic challenges and support for women and LGBT+ academics and PhD students

Bibliographic Data

ID21392647
AuthorsMarco Reggiani (0000-0002-6158-2302, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University of Strathclyde Glasgow UK, corresponding author), Jessica Gagnon (0000-0002-1588-3382, Manchester Institute of Education University of Manchester Manchester UK), Rebecca J Lunn (0000-0002-4258-9349, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University of Strathclyde Glasgow UK)
Year2024
Volume108
Issue6
Pages1637-1669
Publication date2024-11-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueScience Education (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0036-8326 • E-ISSN: 1098-237X
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1002/sce.21899
OpenAlexW4401044622
LanguageEN
Citations received5
References cited90

Barriers to equity, diversity, and inclusion remain in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) for historically underrepresented and marginalized individuals. The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of women and LGBT+ academics and PhD students in the United Kingdom. Specifically, this article examines systemic challenges and support that 82 participants who identified as women and/or LGBT+ academics and PhD students have experienced in their STEM environments and throughout their careers. In this qualitative study, we employed intersectionality theory to frame a thematic analysis of interviews and focus groups. Our findings indicate that the experiences of participants are characterized more by inequities than by support from colleagues, peers, and higher education institutions. Inequities are widespread and intersectional, and have a cumulative impact whenever individuals endure multiple and potentially escalating challenges—which include hard‐to‐spot disadvantages, stereotypes, prejudice, as well as harassment, bullying, and discrimination. Participants’ accounts illustrate the benefits of different support mechanisms but also the limitations of initiatives to support marginalized individuals and groups in STEM that are not systematically embedded across institutions. Based on our findings, we present two conceptual models to better understand systemic challenges and their consequences for women and LGBT+ academics and PhD students in STEM, as well as to inform more holistic support mechanisms to create more inclusive STEM environments. Implications from the study highlight institutional accountability as key to improving climates and transformative change

Inclusion (mineral) · Pedagogy · Science education · Sociology · Career Development and Diversity · Education, Achievement, and Giftedness · Gender Studies · Mentoring and Academic Development · Psychology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access