Making Visible the Invisible: Studying Latina STEM Scholars

Abstract

This chapter focuses on the experience of conducting collaborative, interview-based research on the career pathways of Latina STEM scholars in the United States. In addition to outlining our key findings, we address the process of conducting the research and explain why the Latina experience is crucial to understanding current discrimination practices. We discuss the theoretical foundations of our methodology and the importance of qualitative, in-depth interviews as a specific form of knowledge-production, as well as topics such as researcher ethics, positionality, confidentiality, emotional labor, and the advantages and challenges of interdisciplinary collaboration.

Women in Latin American Academia

“…Public research and university teaching systems need to be diagnosed to serve as a basis for public policies to address this issue (IESALC 2021, UNESCO 2021. In Latin America and Worldwide, this problem has been better studied and analyzed among research teams in the exact sciences, biology, technology, mathematics, and physics (EGANA DEL SOL et al, 2022;FLORES et al, 2022).…”

Toward asset-based LatCrit pedagogies in STEM: centering Latine students’ strengths to reimagine STEM teaching and practice

“…The construction of racial disadvantage among Latine students in STEM has been documented in the overrepresentation of Latine students in under-resourced K-12 schools and limited access to the following: rigorous math and science courses and activities; qualified math and science teachers; role models in sciences and academic services; and financial support to pursue costly STEM degrees (Museus et al, 2011;Rodriguez, 2015;. These structural opportunity gaps are exacerbated by the hostile experiences of discrimination, microaggressions, feelings of inadequacy ('imposter syndrome'), and general presumptions of incompetence that have been identified within the literature as further marginalizing Latine students in STEM (Sorge et al, 2000;Carlone and Johnson, 2007;Crisp and Nora, 2012;George-Jackson et al, 2012;Hazari et al, 2013;Rincón and Rodriguez, 2021;Flores et al, 2022).…”