LGBTQ+ in STEM: Fostering Inclusion and Resolving Disparities Using Demographic Data
Friday, April 21, 2023 | 1:00 pm - 2:30 pm
Buell Hall, Maison Francaise
LGBTQ+ people are estimated to be 20% less represented in STEM fields than statistically expected, and are less likely than non-LGBTQ+ people to stay in STEM majors and earn STEM degrees. Harmful biases and unsupportive STEM environments appear to be partly at fault, with LGBTQ+ people in STEM experiencing more career barriers and workplace harassment than their non-LGBTQ+ counterparts. Despite these disparities, LGBTQ+ people have been left behind in STEM diversity efforts. A major factor is the widespread lack of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) demographic data.
This panel focuses on the role that universities play in building inclusive excellence, cultivating community and belonging for LGBTQ+ people in STEM and higher education, and resolving the increasingly documented challenges and disparities LGBTQ+ people are facing in STEM. The panel features a conversation about how LGBTQ+ challenges in STEM could be remedied by harnessing SOGI data collection and how U.S. universities could move toward SOGI data collection to achieve inclusive excellence and resolve disparities.
This event was sponsored by the Office of the Vice Provost for Faculty Advancement and the Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Council (WGSSC).
Featuring:
Santiago Correa
Assistant Professor of Biomedical Engineer, Columbia University
Santiago Correa’s research operates at the interface of materials science, nanotechnology, and immunology to engineer the immune system and improve human health. He develops biomaterials composed of nano-scale building blocks, which are used to reprogram the body’s immune system to fight cancer, autoimmune disease, and infection. Taking inspiration from nature, Dr. Correa engineers this next-generation technology via supramolecular self-assembly across length scales – first by constructing bioinspired multifunctional nanoparticles that, in turn, self-assemble to produce macroscopic biomaterials imbued with unprecedented immuno-modulatory capabilities. He obtained his B.S. in Biomedical Engineering at Yale prior to completing a Ph.D. in Biological Engineering at MIT. While in the Hammond Lab at MIT, he explored how nanoparticle surface chemistry could be engineered to better target ovarian cancer and to fabricate multifunctional nanomaterials. Afterwards, Dr. Correa completed his postdoctoral training as an NCI F32 Fellow in the Appel Lab at Stanford, where he developed immunomodulatory biomaterials to treat cancer.
Jon Freeman (moderator)
Associate Professor of Psychology, Columbia University
Jon Freeman directs the Social Cognitive & Neural Sciences Lab. His research examines how people understand the social world through a coordination of visual, social, and affective processes. In particular, his work focuses on the cognitive and neural mechanisms underlying person perception, bias and stereotyping, and the real-time formation and dynamics of social and emotional judgments, including the interplay between social cognition and visual perception. He takes an integrative and multi-level approach that makes use of techniques such as functional neuroimaging, computational modeling, and behavioral paradigms. He is also the developer of the data collection and analysis software, MouseTracker, which uses response-directed hand motion to uncover split-second decision-making. Freeman is the recipient of a number of awards, including the National Science Foundation CAREER Award, the Association for Psychological Science’s Janet T. Spence Award for Transformative Early Career Contributions, among others.
Jed Marsh
Vice Provost for Institutional Research, Princeton University
In his role as vice provost, Jed Marsh maintains a set of performance measures used to inform decisions about policy and the goals of the University, facilitates institutional data requests and coordinates institutional survey participation. He also collaborates with the president, provost, other cabinet officers and vice provosts on special University-wide projects. Before coming to Princeton Jed was an associate dean of the Graduate School at Northwestern where he developed tools to track doctoral student placement and student enrollment and retention models that were used in the school's financial aid planning. He also developed and implemented a multi-departmental visit program that has effectively recruited high-quality applicants. He received his Ph.D. from Northwestern's Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology and Cell Biology and holds bachelor's and master's degrees from the State University College of New York-Plattsburgh. He has also served as a researcher and postdoctoral fellow at the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons and at the University of Alabama-Birmingham.
Elana Redfield
Federal Policy Director, Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law
Elana Redfield coordinates the Williams Institute’s legal research and analysis related to federal and state policies that impact lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, and intersex people. Before joining the Williams Institute, she worked with the New York City Department of Social Services, where she oversaw the agency’s initiative to improve safety net services and homelessness interventions for LGBTQI communities. Prior to this, she served as a staff attorney for the Sylvia Rivera Law Project, providing direct legal services for low-income transgender people and transgender people of color.
Travis T. York
Director of Inclusive STEMM Ecosystems for Equity & Diversity (ISEED), American Association for the Advancement of Science
Travis T. York’s research and work focus on catalyzing and sustaining systemic change and transformation to achieve inclusive and equitable access and progress through STEM pathways into the STEM workforce. Within AAAS, he provides leadership to a talented team who collaborate to create change in over 20 grant-funded projects and initiatives spanning all STEMM fields and the entire educational pathway including AAAS’s SEA Change Initiative, Science in the Classroom, ARISE Network, S-STEM Initiative, L’Oreal USA Women in Science Fellowships, and HBCU Making & Innovation Showcase. He is a Co-PI on NSF INCLUDES Aspire Alliance - an effort to develop a more inclusive and diversified STEM faculty; and serves as a Co-PI on a U.S. Department of Education IES Assessment Grant titled, Affording Degree Completion: A Study of Completion Grants at Accessible Public Universities in collaboration with the Coalition of Urban Serving Universities and Temple University. He has authored numerous peer-reviewed articles and book chapters, including his most recent article, “Completion Grants: A multi-method examination of institutional practice,” in the Journal of Student Financial Aid. He received his Ph.D. in Higher Education Administration from The Pennsylvania State University, masters in Higher Education and bachelors with distinction from Geneva College. He also studied at Oxford University’s Center for Medieval & Renaissance Studies through Keble College in 2003-04.
- There is a sense of invisibility amongst the LGBTQ+ scientific community. We need better data to understand what is working and what is not, so we can ensure that people have resources and tools to succeed.
- In a policy landscape that is constantly changing, universities are interested in collecting SOGI (sexual orientation and gender identity) data but often don’t know where to begin.
- Comprehensive data collection can help us move towards more inclusive excellence.
- There is extensive data that shows deep disparities for LGBTQ+ people in STEM:
- LGBTQ+ people are 20% less represented in STEM-related federal agencies than non-STEM-related agencies;
- Men in same-sex couples were 12% less likely to complete a STEM degree than men in other-sex couples;
- LGBTQ+ people in STEM report more negative workplace experiences than do non-LGBTQ+ people in STEM;
- LGBTQ+ people in STEM are more likely to experience career barriers, harassment, and professional devaluation than non-LGBTQ+ people;
- More than 40% of LGBTQ+ people in STEM are not out to colleagues
- At Princeton, they have found that people need to see themselves in the tables and charts that we present in University data collections.
- Gender identity and sexual orientation voluntary surveys are dynamic data - we need to keep working on them over time.
- Nobody asks survey questions in the same way, so universities, independent, and federal institutions need to come together in order to get the most representative data.
- Change takes a lot of time. Federal agencies take a lot of time. We, as universities, need not to wait for them to figure it out but we need to ask and systematize the questions and methods ourselves.
- The STEM enterprise is woefully inadequate for the work that America needs it to do - the talent development and actualization of American citizenry is not optimally performing. If we are to meet these challenges we need STEM ecosystems that provide more diverse voices to address them.
- The way we collect data now is insufficient. We have SOGI data but many institutions don’t do anything with the information they collect. We should use the data to understand the ways individuals and subgroups move through and persist through STEM pathways to understand whether that system is working or in many cases where it is not working.
- Why does representation and equity and inclusion matter? Arguments include: It’s the moral imperative; there is a social justice argument; research shows that when we have diverse STEM labs, classrooms, etc, the science that is done is markedly better; diverse and innovative research teams produce more disseminable science. Equity and excellence are inextricably linked. This argument is applicable to SOGI data.
- There is a federal executive order that mandates institutions to provide accessible, excellent, and diverse environments. Most institutions do not know if they are complying with this executive order.
- We cannot wait for a national solution. We need to build capacity for SOGI data collection and use it, and to understand the potential concerns or risks of collecting this data.
- Does the law permit the collection of SOGI data? What does the law say about using SOGI data? And what other factors influence the collection of SOGI data? Many laws govern the use of demographic data (i.e Title VII, Title XIX) There are some states where the state has encouraged collection by “request to collect”, but not all states do this.
- We have to keep in mind all kinds of legal factors, like the state policy landscape. For instance, the ACLU has tracked 467 anti-LGBTQI bills in the US right now. This is important to take into account.
- There are a lot of initiatives and institutions that have worked on how best to use collected data. For example, private parties can request data to be de-identified with FERPA. There are also emergency situation exceptions to FERPA that may be worth looking at.
- People are challenging Title IX to exclude trans women from its protection. But by doing so they are conceding that Title IX right now does protect trans women.
- At the federal level there is extensive data about how data should be collected in a comprehensive and safe way.
- At the institutional level, it is important to parse two different items: one is administrative data from institutions that is collected to ensure institutions are serving their students well; another one is voluntary data that students can access and feel represented in.
- Call to action: We need an outpouring of American citizens demanding for us to advocate to use the best science, evidence-based decision-making for these issues. We should be using all resources and taking cues from leading institutions.