An Intersectional Approach to Investigating Persistence Among Women of Color Tenure-Track Engineering Faculty

Abstract

A growing body of literature has examined the underrepresentation of women of color (WOC) in university engineering programs, but its primary focus has been on the experiences of women students of color. Research on WOC in engineering is usually drawn from all of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, which does little to illuminate the nuanced experiences of WOC within engineering culture. We sought a primary emphasis on persistence and perseverance rather than the typical examinations on mentoring, inventions, work-life balance, or the challenges that WOC face in engineering faculty environments. There are few studies on how and why women of color persist in academia in the face of the intersection of racism and sexism. Using intersectionality as a theoretical framework and inductive qualitative analyses of interviews with 56 women of color who identified as Asian, Black, Latina, and/or multiracial, we analyzed the sources of support for their persistence. Asking which collective factors support WOC in general and which are unique to each of the racial/ gender groups, we identified three major themes-persistence is aided by (1) supportive colleagues internal to the department or institution, (2) supportive colleagues external to the institution, and(3) the intersectional considerations of group-specific nuances shared by Black, Latina, and Asian women engineering faculty members. The implications suggest women of color thrive in departments with supportive faculty, proactive leadership, and a commitment to professional development. We outline specific racial group interventions that can be beneficial for Asian, Black, and Latina engineering faculty.

Who's who: How “women of color” are (or are not) represented in STEM education research

“…The author's lack of attention to incorporating these perspectives within their analysis presents an idea that these particular factors may or may not influence the need for transition programs specific to women of color (a form of homogenization). While the lack of attention to these nuances could be a matter of sample size, as noted as a limitation by the author, it is important to recognize that while there are shared experiences among people within umbrella categories, the extent to which they feel those experiences differ based on their multiplicative identities (e.g., McGee et al, 2021; Ong, 2005).…”

“…Scholars have also investigated WOC as a collective group, combining various experiences under one collected “woman of color” identity (e.g., Espinosa, 2011; Johnson et al, 2011; Ong et al, 2018). Though this second approach (i.e., using WOC as a collective grouping mechanism) has generated robust scholarship on WOC in STEM, institutional changes based on this scholarship do not always fully account for individual differences in experience (McGee et al, 2021).…”

“…For example, McGee et al (2021), in their qualitative study of WOC engineering faculty, found that different racial groups needed different supports. Yet, McGee et al (2021) would have overlooked these group‐specific needs if they had not leveraged a nuanced, intersectional approach.…”

“…For example, McGee et al (2021), in their qualitative study of WOC engineering faculty, found that different racial groups needed different supports. Yet, McGee et al (2021) would have overlooked these group‐specific needs if they had not leveraged a nuanced, intersectional approach. Existing scholarship and what representation within empirical research implies regarding progress for “all” WOC, has the potential to reify the silencing and erasure of individuals if scholars and practitioners are not considering within‐group specificities when examining collective, shared ontological experiences.…”

“…While federal and more localized efforts have advanced the representation of individuals who fit within some of these broader categories, it is evident through continued research and reports that some groups have benefited more than others through these generalized approaches (McGee et al, 2021). Some policies and practices have even perpetuated inequity and minoritization within STEM (Ridgeway & McGee, 2018).…”