Abstract
Increasing diversity in organizations has been shown to lead to more open, innovative and productive organizations. Within sustainability science, the need for diverse opinions, experiences and disciplines cannot be overstated. Two of the core principles of sustainability are normative and collaborative competencies that emphasize the need for diverse stakeholder involvement. To solve complicated, societal problems, we need to ensure that voices typically unheard, have a part to play in developing solutions for sustainability challenges. This is becoming even more critical as we see the impacts of sustainability problems being disproportionately felt by vulnerable populations, which often are populated by Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC). Despite this evident need, our current academic positions in the field of sustainability and environmental science, like most STEM disciplines, are predominantly held by white, male faculty.
You have full access to this open access chapter, Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
1 Change, Without the Change
Universities across the US are currently pushing to increase faculty and student diversity because of recent, pressing events that once again, unearthed the racial inequalities and injustices that exist within our institutions. Yet, the majority of interventions adopted are short-sighted and do not consider the fundamental reasons why these problems persist in our society. These issues are critical to address in order to transform education for sustainability in just, inclusive and authentic ways.
One strategy used by universities is to hire Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) faculty who work in fields related to justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion (JEDI), thus working on the assumption that historically excluded persons should be working to eradicate the injustices that they had no part in initiating or perpetuating. This misconception that people of color are all activists or vocal on the issues affecting their identified groups, is unfair and furthers the current stereotyping behaviors that exist today. Many BIPOC and women faculty, though aware and unhappy with the current system, cope in ways that do not demonstrate their frustrations and merely want to be recognized for their contributions to their field of study, as their colleagues would. The expectation that they should be more interested or active on issues of JEDI, places an unfair and extra burden – including stress and invisible labor – that others do not have to contend with (Jimenez et al., 2019). This practice also continues the cycle of isolating BIPOC and women in fields where they are already present; a form of epistemic exclusion (Settles et al., 2019).
The STEM fields have been traditionally higher paid and highly regarded when compared to other fields such as the Humanities. Yet, these are the very fields with the lowest recruitment and highest attrition for BIPOC and women (Li & Koedel, 2017). Women and BIPOC faculty are the lowest paid in academia and the barriers to entry in the STEM fields perpetuate this. This disparity further enables the cycle of keeping students who are BIPOC and female, out of STEM fields, as one major determinant of one’s field of study, is the ability to find a role model or mentor who shares their characteristics (Arnim, 2019; Beech et al., 2013). It also means that the perspectives and experiences of a large and important group have been mostly absent from the STEM fields, resulting in unrealized solutions and innovations.
2 Systemic Stereotype Threats
Many of the interventions used by universities ignore the underlying reasons why historically excluded persons of color are scarcely present in STEM fields, and getting traction has been slow. BIPOC and women are notoriously known to have low enrollments in STEM degrees including at the faculty level (Li & Koedel, 2017). Studies have shown that it is not a lack of interest that leads to the avoidance, or exit from, STEM fields (Burke, 2007). Some interpersonal reasons for low retention of BIPOC and women in STEM fields include alienation by colleagues, micro-aggressive environments, and the lack of representative mentors or role models to inspire new students/faculty in disadvantaged minorities to pursue these disciplines (Arnim, 2019). Even deeper, systemic threats pervade our academic institutions and steer BIPOC and women away from STEM fields, in forms such as masculine norms/privileging masculine ways of working; unchecked biases in recruitment, hiring, development, evaluation, and promotion processes; unconscious perpetuation of culturally-embedded stereotypes; color-blind racial ideologies; the myth of meritocracy that cripples the ability of historically excluded persons of color from joining STEM fields; and financial and economic barriers related to testing, applications, cost of study, etc. (Block et al., 2019; Dupree & Boykin, 2021; Estrada et al., 2016).
Systemic stereotype threat also leads to the exit from STEM fields (Burke, 2007). “Systemic stereotype threat occurs when an individual is in a system that is characterized by racial or gender disparities and the implicit belief about the reason for these disparities is due to stereotypes about deficits of individual group members rather than systemic inequality” (Block et al., 2019, p. 35; see also Steele et al., 2002). BIPOC and women faculty who work in environments characterized by systemic stereotype threat have been seen to cope in different ways (Block et al., 2019; Settles et al., 2019). Block et al. (2019) present empirical research on the coping mechanisms used by women faculty in STEM disciplines to contend with systemic stereotype threats. The three response patterns identified in the article are: (1) Fending off the threat – keeping the threat invisible to self and the association with the stereotype invisible to others; (2) Confronting the threat – making the threat visible to others (3) Sustaining self in the presence of threat – recognizing the threat as a dilemma to be navigated not as a problem to be solved immediately. Settles et al. (2019) studied the response patterns of BIPOC faculty within STEM fields, and have similar results with the use of three invisibility strategies: (1) Strategic invisibility – disengaging with colleagues, while engaging with scholarly activities; (2) Working harder – to prove worth and improve visibility (of work); (3) Disengagement – removed effort from work. While there is much to be understood regarding when and why particular strategies within the response patterns are utilized, it is agreed that the perception of the threat (related to both organizational and individual factors) is a major driver of the response pattern used (Block et al., 2011, 2019; Settles et al., 2019).
3 Reflecting on My Own Response Patterns
As a Black, female academic in STEM, I reflect below on how I have utilized different response patterns to navigate my career within the fields of engineering and sustainability science.
3.1 To Prove I Can? Or Is It … Who I Am?
Unlike many Black Americans, I was not raised in a society rampant with racial inequity. I was born and raised on a small Caribbean island where most of the population identified as Black. My exposure to the issues of race came from books and television – which perpetuated the belief that this was a ‘them, not me’ issue. This perception that the threat was not my own, kept it invisible to me when I first moved to the United States.
In my first role as a faculty member, I often felt like an outsider to the faculty body. I reasoned that this could be because of three things: (1) My introverted personality and/or unfamiliarity with me and my culture, (2) My non-tenure-track status, (3) Unfamiliarity with my work or the quality of my research. My response was, therefore, to silently work at building up my research portfolio to make my work (and myself) more visible. I engaged in strategies of ‘over-effort’ and ‘isolation’ as discussed by Block et al. (2019). I said yes to everything. I even volunteered for everything. If I proved my worth, my colleagues and department would find me a valuable member of the department. Rather, the result of my over-involvement has been exhaustion, burnout, and an eventual diminishing motivation to continue work that no one ever recognizes. By making the threat and myself invisible – by appearing to take everything in stride – I also made my efforts, and the toll it was taking on me, invisible.
3.2 An Attempt to ‘Confront the Threat’
I became more cognizant of the issues related to race and stereotypes after volunteering to be on a university committee for faculty women of color. It was in conversations with these women of color, that I realized that our stories were the same. We were unrecognized, overworked, and over-compensating for issues that have been persistent within the academic institution since its genesis. The realization that what I had been experiencing was part of systemic discrimination within the academic institution, left me with deep feelings of hurt, anger, fear, and ultimately, confusion. Not unlike the stages of grief… Having never had discussions or experiences in which I needed to confront discrimination, it left me in a state of anxiety, and an inability to confront a threat that I desperately wanted to address.
There is an assumption that all people of color, particularly those with some standing in the community, or in an established career, should be voicing their frustrations with the discrimination that still pervades our major institutions. If you’re not, then you probably are one of those who ‘sold out’ or are deliberately blind to the injustices of society. I carry deep guilt that I have not been as vocal and active as my female colleagues of color. They have been so deeply embedded and involved in the issues of diversity and inclusion, that I often feel like a ‘copout’ to my race and gender. It’s not that I’ve cast a blind eye. I’ve tried to speak up. I’ve tried to become more aware of the tribulations that black people face in America and the rest of the world. I’ve even tried to reason with those who unfairly discriminated against me and others. I’ve given them the benefit of the doubt. But I quickly realized that, especially in an old institution such as academia, those who speak up are labeled as the trouble-makers, the rousers, the ‘angry black woman.’ This kind of visibility was not what I sought, and so my response adjusted accordingly.
3.3 “I’ll Just Sit Quietly in the Corner …”
My natural tendency to avoid confrontation kicked in, not long after. I convinced myself that if I worked even harder and created exceptional work, that I would not be seen as a Black person, but rather as an extremely valuable faculty member. This strategy was ultimately unsustainable. With an over-full teaching load (and taking on extra to supplement the low pay), serving as a mentor to many students, sitting on a variety of department, university, and community committees, attempts to carry on research and projects of impact and balancing these with the parenting of two small kids, soon left me battling several chronic illnesses, all tied to high-stress levels.
3.4 Sustaining Self in the Presence of Threat
A moment of clarity came after my own body forced me to stop working over a summer break, because of ongoing illness. I reflected on the outcomes of my efforts over the years and realized that I had been supporting department efforts, focusing on building and enhancing programs, preparing students for research and careers, working with communities that needed and appreciated the academic support and others, giving talks and presentations – but that none of these were related to the thing that mattered most in the academic scene – published research. All this work and I had still not attained the one element that was most recognized in my field.
This clarity came at another momentous event in my life. After 3 years with my department, I was assigned a mentor. It was with their help that I was able to define what success meant for me (as opposed to just my department) and learned the important skill of saying “no,” even to seemingly great opportunities. I also recognized the need to accept my identity as a Black, female, immigrant scholar, and utilize my unique perspectives and experiences within my work.
Years of feelings of inadequacy, hiding away, keeping quiet, and desperation to prove my worth gave way to an acceptance that the system was indeed flawed, but with an acknowledgment that the system cannot change overnight. I reasoned that continual (maybe even subtle) prodding, increased awareness, and finding the right mentors and support, was a more actionable and strategic way to slowly transform the system from within. I still have days where I toggle between the response patterns, and I think that it is somewhat necessary to shift between response patterns depending on the context. But overall, my definition of success as a scholar, mother, wife, global citizen has transformed the way I work. My drive to be an exceptional scholar is now purely based on my own self-motivation to develop and disrupt my field and make positive changes in the world.
3.5 Is There a Right Response?
Despite my having arrived at the ‘Sustaining self in the presence of threat’ response as being the most appropriate for myself, I have also recognized BIPOC and women colleagues around me using various strategies within the response patterns. In my observations, it appears that for transformation change to occur, we need all three responses simultaneously.
Having stellar outcomes from those engaged in ‘Fending off the Threat/Strategic Invisibility/Working Harder’ responses, makes the case for the value and appreciation of the work of BIPOC & women scholars. Whilst it is unfair to have this extra burden of proof of self-worth, it helps build the case for transformation. We also need to build awareness of these existing threats within our institutions from those who ‘Confront the Threat.’ Without awareness, we are perpetuating a cycle of threats that remains visible only to ourselves as BIPOC and women faculty. And finally, we need those who are able to work with and within the current systems, who are ‘Sustaining Themselves in the Presence of Threat’, to find ways to continuously build awareness, create disruptions, and have non-BIPOC faculty begin to question their role in perpetuating systemic stereotype threats in the academy.
4 Moving Forward
As universities continue to push for increasing diversity within their faculty and student bodies, it is important to recognize the factors that affect the retention of BIPOC & women. Studies on systemic stereotype threat have found that the presence of such threat can lead to lower confidence, higher turnover (von Hippel et al., 2011 as seen in Block et al., 2019); decreased well-being (von Hippel et al., 2015 as seen in Block et al., 2019); lower beliefs in career advancement (Fassiotto et al., 2016 as seen in Block et al., 2019); and negative physical and psychological health consequences (Juster et al., 2010; Settles et al., 2019). While some BIPOC and women faculty have successfully navigated the academic world, and are valued members of the academic community, many others fall victim to the threats they face. Within this pool lies the untapped, undervalued, and unrealized potential that can contribute tremendously to the university, to the wider discipline, and to better sustainability science (Hunt et al., 2015).
To end, I wish to make a call to universities looking to increase their diversity rates, to consider not just the recruitment of BIPOC and women faculty, but also to recognize the various threats and pressures faced by current BIPOC and women. In doing so we can properly anticipate and prepare for potential barriers that BIPOC and women may face (Block et al., 2011). In particular, in STEM fields where BIPOC & women faculty are represented in disgracefully low numbers, the threats exist throughout our academic institution, from kindergarten to the highest academic achievements. An awareness of these can start the process of dismantling systemic stereotypes that were in-built into our institutions. This is also extremely relevant to environment and sustainability science, where the diversity of perspectives and experiences are necessary assets to sustainability problem-solving (van der Leeuw et al., 2012; Wiek, 2011). This is particularly of great importance, as the negative impacts of sustainability problems are disproportionately felt by poor and vulnerable populations, often which are BIPOC communities (Anguelovski et al., 2019). It is my hope that departments and universities begin to take the necessary steps to create communities where BIPOC and women faculty feel safe, welcomed, equal, and valued.
References
Anguelovski, I., Connolly, J. J., Pearsall, H., Shokry, G., Checker, M., Maantay, J., Gould, K., Lewis, T., Maroko, A., & Roberts, J. T. (2019). Opinion: Why green “climate gentrification” threatens poor and vulnerable populations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(52), 26139–26143. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1920490117
Arnim, E. (2019). A third of minority students leave STEM majors. Here’s why. EAB.com. Accessed from https://eab.com/insights/daily-briefing/student-success/a-third-of-minority-students-leave-stem-majors-heres-why/
Beech, B. M., Calles-Escandon, J., Hairston, K. G., Langdon, S. E., Latham-Sadler, B. A., & Bell, R. A. (2013). Mentoring programs for underrepresented minority faculty in academic medical centers: A systematic review of the literature. Academic Medicine, 88(4), 541–549. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31828589e3
Block, C. J., Koch, S. M., Liberman, B. E., Merriweather, T. J., & Robertson, L. (2011). Contending with stereotype threat at work: A model of long-term responses. The Counseling Psychologist, 39(4), 570–600. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1177/0011000010382459
Block, C. J., Cruz, M., Bairley, M., Harel-Marian, T., & Roberson, L. (2019). Inside the prism of an invisible threat: Shining a light on the hidden work of contending with systemic stereotype threat in STEM fields. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 113, 33–50. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.09.007
Burke, R. (2007). Women and minorities in STEM: A primer. In R. J. Burke & M. C. Mattis (Eds.), Women and minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: Upping the numbers (pp. 3–27). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Dupree, C. H., & Boykin, C. M. (2021). Racial inequality in academia: Systemic origins, modern challenges, and policy recommendations. Policy Insights From the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8(1), 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F2372732220984183
Estrada, M., Burnett, M., Campbell, A. G., Campbell, P. B., Denetclaw, W. F., Gutiérrez, C. G., Hurtado, S., John, G. H., Matsui, J., McGee, R., Okpodu, C. M., Robinson, T. J., Summers, M. F., Werner-Washburne, & Zavala, M. (2016). Improving underrepresented minority student persistence in STEM. CBE Life Sciences Education, 15(3), es510.1187/cbe.16-01-0038. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-01-0038
Fassiotto, M., Hamel, E. O., Ku, M., Correll, S., Grewal, D., Lavori, P., Periyakoil, V. J., Reiss, A., Sandborg, C., Walton, G., Winkleby, M., & Valentine, H. (2016). Women in academic medicine: Measuring stereotype threat among junior faculty. Journal of Women’s Health, 25(3), 292–298. https://doi.org/10.1089/2Fjwh.2015.5380
Hunt, V., Layton, D., & Prince, S. (2015). Diversity matters. McKinsey & Company, 1(1), 15–29.
Jimenez, M. F., Laverty, T. M., Bombaci, S. P., Wilkins, K., Bennett, D. E., & Pejchar, L. (2019). Underrepresented faculty play a disproportionate role in advancing diversity and inclusion. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 3, 1030–1033. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0911-5
Juster, R., McEwen, B. S., & Lupien, S. J. (2010). Allostatic load biomarkers of chronic stress and impact on health and cognition. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 35(1), 2–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.10.002
Li, D., & Koedel, C. (2017). Representation and salary gaps by race-ethnicity and gender at selective public universities. Educational Researcher, 46(7), 343–354. https://doi.org/10.3102/2F0013189X17726535
Settles, I. H., Buchanan, N. T., & Dotson, K. (2019). Scrutinized but not recognized: (In)visibility and hypervisibility experiences of faculty of color. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 113, 62–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.06.003
Steele, C. M., Spencer, S. J., & Aronson, J. (2002). Contending with group image: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 379–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80009-0
van der Leeuw, S., Wiek, A., Harlow, J., & Buizer, J. (2012). How much time do we have? Urgency and rhetoric in sustainability science. Sustainability Science, 7, 115–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0153-1
von Hippel, C., Issa, M., Ma, R., & Stokes, A. (2011). Stereotype threat: Antecedents and consequences for working women. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(2), 151–161. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.749
von Hippel, C., Sekaquaptewa, D., & McFarlane, M. (2015). Stereotype threat among women in finance: Negative effects on identity, workplace well-being, and recruiting. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 39(3), 405–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684315574501
Wiek, W. (2011). Key competencies in sustainability: A reference framework for academic program development. Sustainability Science, 6(2), 203–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0132-6
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Augustin-Behravesh, SA. (2023). Diversity in Academia and Sustainability Science: The STEM Blindspot. In: Rivera Maulucci, M.S., Pfirman, S., Callahan, H.S. (eds) Transforming Education for Sustainability. Environmental Discourses in Science Education, vol 7. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13536-1_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13536-1_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-13535-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-13536-1
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)