How Gender and Race of Geologists are Portrayed in Physical Geology Textbooks

Mattox, Steve; Bridenstine, Michelle; Burns, B. H.; Torresen, Emmeline; Koning, Alex; Meek, Samantha; Ritchie, Matthew; Schafer, Neil; Shepard, Lindsay; Slater, Angela; Waters, Tamara; Wigent, Amanda

doi:10.5408/1089-9995-56.2.156

Cited by 17 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When it comes to individuals that are minoritized due to sociodemographic characteristics (ethnicity/race and gender), one could easily deduce that factors such as lack of interest, anxiety, and fear may be higher for them relative to nonminoritized groups regarding STEM fields; 21,23,26−29 thus, it is reasonable to hypothesize that the differences in attitudes between these groups play a role in the differences in their achievements. Such a hypothesis, in conjunction with the fact that faculty and course structure 8,12 can impact student attitudes, is why this study addresses the following research questions:…”

Section: Attitude and Equitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the Experiences of Different Identity Groups in a General Chemistry Course

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General chemistry is a gateway course that students from several STEM-related majors take at the beginning of their college careers. Faced with high attrition rates of students in STEM fields and even higher rates for groups minoritized due to gender and ethnicity/race, this study explored how a general chemistry course influenced students’ interests in chemistry. CHEM 1 and CHEM 2 students’ perceptions of science before taking a general chemistry course and the evolution of their perceptions of chemistry over a semester were explored. Data were collected using pre- and postsurveys and analyzed based on race/ethnic and gender groups. The results showed both CHEM 1 and 2 students held generally positive views toward science at the beginning of the semester, regardless of race/ethnicity. Toward the end of the semester, more CHEM 1 students had positive perceptions of chemistry compared to CHEM 2 students, with students from minoritized groups indicating more negative perceptions of chemistry than their nonminoritized counterparts. Even though female students and students from groups minoritized due to race/ethnicity are entering their general chemistry course with similar perceptions of science and belief in their abilities, they are leaving these courses with more negative perceptions and lower confidence in their abilities compared to other student groups. The main factors influencing students’ perceptions were the course instructors, teaching assistants, and the course structure. We hope these findings can shed light on future pedagogies in general chemistry to help improve students’ perceptions of chemistry, which can increase students’ success and persistence rates in science-related fields, including chemistry.

show abstract

Section: Attitude and Equitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the Experiences of Different Identity Groups in a General Chemistry Course

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lukanda (2021) also claims that women are underrepresented as authors and sources of science stories in the media, based on a content analysis of 317 stories published in two Ugandan newspapers, and that the chances of females being published as authors and sources increase if they collaborate with a male. According to Mattox et al (2008), who analyzed physical geology textbooks sold in the United States, books represent males as 3.5 times more likely to be geologists than females; this ratio far surpasses the current percentage of men and women joining this career (58 percent male and 42 percent female for B.S. degrees in Earth Science).…”

Section: Background and Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Women Underrepresentation in Editorial Boards of Geology Journals and the Utopia of Gender Equality

Henriques

Garcia

2022

Front. Earth Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 5th goal of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development aims at promoting gender equality and empowering all women and girls at all levels of decision making. This includes editorial decisions in the frame of the dissemination of scientific knowledge as a result of research and development activities. This work analyses the women representation in the editorial boards of 53 subscription or open access geology journals of all quartile rankings included in the Web of Science Core Collection™ in 2020 in order to assess how far female geoscientists are from the 2030 Agenda targets concerning gender equality. Among the analyzed journals, in 85% the position of editor(s)-in-chief is (are) occupied by a man or a group of men, and in the remaining 15% by women. Moreover, 80% of the people that make up the editorial board of the same journals are men and 20% are women. Only one journal indicates the editor(s)-in-chief gender and the number of members per gender that make up the editorial board. The strong gender gap detected in this study shows that the goal of gender equality in the editorial boards of geological journals still remains a long way off, and publishers should therefore increase gender diversity in editorial teams and referee pools.

show abstract

“…One way geoscience educators can promote positive experiences is through intentional anti-oppressive, intersectional course design, recognizing the interrelated ways that multiple social identities can impact opportunities (Núñez et al, 2020). For instance, instead of relying on textbook portrayals of white male geoscientists (Bush & Mattox, 2019), teachers can highlight contributions by scientists from marginalized backgrounds ( Table 1). Exposing students to relatable role models inspires a sense of belonging, increasing recruitment and retention of underrepresented minorities (Hernandez et al, 2018).…”

Section: The Classroommentioning

confidence: 99%

Counteracting Systemic Bias in the Lab, Field, and Classroom

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Events in 2020, including the killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and others, ignited a global conversation across all sectors of society about racism, white supremacy, and other systems of oppression experienced by marginalized groups. The geoscience community has responded with statements, reading groups, and committees addressing the overall lack of diversity, equity, and inclusion within our field. The sad truth is that our community has discussed its lack of diversity, particularly related to race and gender, for decades with few measurable improvements (Bernard & Cooperdock, 2018; Bromery, 1972). This lack of diversity, which spans race, gender, disability, sexuality and other social categories, contributes directly to the lack of inclusion and equity experienced by people from marginalized groups (Dutt, 2020). Recent efforts have focused on systemic bias-the ways in which institutional culture, norms, and procedures exclude people based on their social identity and/or background, in both intentional and unintentional ways. Several calls have been made to address this at the institutional and federal agency level (e.g., notimeforsilence.org), and many professional societies responded by updating codes of conduct and retooling other functions with a diversity lens. At the same time, faculty, principal investigators (PIs), and other scientists that manage labs, lead fieldwork, or teach students also have an important role to play. As authoritative figures of environments that people navigate on a near-daily basis, these individuals have outsized influence over the spaces where students and trainees most keenly feel the adverse impacts of systemic bias. This power to alter career trajectories is most apparent with reference letters, grades, and providing access to resources and opportunities ("gatekeeping"), but it also manifests subtly in day-today interactions and norms that can either support or undermine people's sense of belonging, fulfillment, and confidence. Here, we highlight actions for scientists supervising labs, fieldwork, and classrooms to address systemic biases that impact students and trainees, our next generation of geoscientists. While faculty and PIs are the target of this article, these ideas are relevant to any individual in a position of authority (e.g., lab managers, teaching assistants, fieldwork organizers). We focus on tractable actions that can have immediate positive impacts for marginalized community members, mitigating harm while critical but protracted progress continues at higher organizational levels (Keisling et al., 2020; Ovienmhada et al., 2020). We call on all scientists in leadership roles to personally reflect and engage with research on anti-oppressive practices published by historians, social scientists, and education scholars, and to translate this learning into sustained, lifelong action.

show abstract

How Gender and Race of Geologists are Portrayed in Physical Geology Textbooks

Cited by 17 publications

References 0 publications

Evaluating the Experiences of Different Identity Groups in a General Chemistry Course

Evaluating the Experiences of Different Identity Groups in a General Chemistry Course

Women Underrepresentation in Editorial Boards of Geology Journals and the Utopia of Gender Equality

Counteracting Systemic Bias in the Lab, Field, and Classroom

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About