To better prepare graduate students to address societal problems, scholars have asserted the need to foster students' abilities to engage across differences in social identities, values, and beliefs. Yet few studies have examined whether and how graduate students learn about equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) during their training. Acknowledging this void, our critical constructivist comparative case study explored how 44 graduate students in an array of disciplines and fields at 2 institutions were socialized to EDI across their experiences. Our findings indicate that academic departments rarely discuss EDI, and when they do, they highlight the need for increased compositional diversity. Participants' experiences with faculty, in courses, in departmental gatherings, and in lab/research settings communicated the relevance or lack thereof of EDI to students' disciplines and fields. Because EDI was often omitted from discussions in students' departments, multiple participants with minoritized identities expressed feeling marginalized and tokenized, if not overtly targeted, based on their identities. To supplement their learning about EDI and to find additional sources of support, many students participated in programs/courses through their graduate college or engaged with identity-centered student organizations. Our research illuminates the need for academic departments to consistently provide intentional opportunities for individuals to learn about EDI in their disciplines and fields if we are to create inclusive learning environments and prepare graduate students to contribute to a complex and interdependent global society.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to explore how graduate students demonstrated agency after having oppressive or invalidating experiences based on their socially constructed identities during graduate school and the effects of leveraging agency. Design/methodology/approach This study used critical constructivist qualitative methods (i.e. interviews and visual methods) to explore how 44 graduate students across an array of disciplines and fields at two public research institutions in the USA demonstrated agency after having oppressive or invalidating experiences targeting one or more of their socially constructed identities. Findings In response to oppressive or invalidating experiences related to their socially constructed identity, participants engaged in self-advocacy, sought/created support via community, conserved their psychological and emotional energy and constructed space for identity-conscious scholarship and practice. Although participants leveraged their agency, the strategies they used were often geared toward surviving environments that were not designed to affirm their identities or support their success. Research limitations/implications This study highlights the need for additional research to complicate educators’ understandings of how graduate students respond to oppressive or invalidating experiences and the nature of bi-directional socialization processes. Practical implications The findings of this study reinforce the need to foster equitable and inclusive graduate education experiences where students may use their agency to thrive rather than to survive. Originality/value Few studies examine graduate students’ agency during their socialization to their disciplines and fields. This study adds complexity to researchers’ understandings of bi-directional socialization processes in the context of graduate education.

No abstract

Educators struggle to recruit and retain graduate students whose social identities are underrepresented in their disciplines and fields, but few studies explicitly explore what students learn about social identity during their graduate training. In this critical constructivist case study, we explored what a diverse group of 44 graduate students learned in their academic departments about the (ir)relevance of social identity to their disciplines/fields. Participants described departments that (a) deepened their awareness of social identity and its relevance to their disciplines/fields; (b) evaded social identity, suggesting it was irrelevant; and (c) welcomed some identities but not others (i.e., conditional acceptance). Our findings suggest that understanding graduate students' experiences in their academic homes is essential to advancing equity within and beyond graduate education. We offer recommendations for educators and administrators to enact organizational change so that people with a diverse array of social identities may thrive in their institutions, disciplines, and professions.