通过将公平伦理制度化,加速 STEM 高等教育中的种族行动主义

IF 1.3 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
E. McGee, Terrell R. Morton, Devin T. White, Whitney Frierson
{"title":"通过将公平伦理制度化,加速 STEM 高等教育中的种族行动主义","authors":"E. McGee, Terrell R. Morton, Devin T. White, Whitney Frierson","doi":"10.1177/01614681231216518","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background/Context: The United States invests in STEM education, but this investment is racialized and political. The country wants to maintain global economic domination, but there are also calls to diversify the STEM workforce (Baber, 2015; Basile & Lopez, 2015; Vakil & Ayers, 2019). This context leaves Black and Brown people to navigate racially hostile, toxic, and oppressive STEM learning and working environments (Bullock, 2017; Erete et al., 2020; Wright & Riley, 2021). Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study: This conceptual paper offers strategies for institutionalizing equity ethics in STEM higher education. The paper attends to the core components of equity ethics and its possibilities while identifying structural constraints. Equity ethics is an equity-minded perspective that focuses on leveraging the multiple forms of knowledge associated with understanding and engaging the natural world to foster an oppression-free society that specifically enhances the lives of Black and Brown people. We also examine specific cases of STEM education and research scholars and practitioners who are committed to engaging and uplifting racially minoritized communities through the intersection of STEM and justice. Research Design: This conceptual paper takes a qualitative approach. It uses the existing literature to review the current state of diversity in STEM, the major components of an equity ethic, the structural and institutional barriers people of color face in STEM higher education, and how equity ethics may be institutionalized. In particular, we highlight examples of equity ethics in action to provide models for action and policy change. Conclusions/Recommendations: Institutionalized equity ethics at the mid-institutional level (e.g., departments and units) would require all faculty to mentor Black and Brown STEM students through critical transitions. We also recommend revising department- and unit-level policies and practices around access to resources that are critical for STEM achievement and knowledge production. Although expanding and sustaining financial investments in equity-focused endeavors is required, these investments must also come with the power and agency to transform institutional structures around STEM access, learning, and innovation. Transformation of top-level policies and practices could include changes to institutional admissions processes and ensuring that racist gatekeeping mechanisms are removed, while also requiring senior-level administrators to have training in racial justice ideologies and praxes. Building equity ethics into STEM higher education is essential to creating a more just and equitable STEM ecosystem.","PeriodicalId":48274,"journal":{"name":"Teachers College Record","volume":"133 1","pages":"108 - 139"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accelerating Racial Activism in STEM Higher Education by Institutionalizing Equity Ethics\",\"authors\":\"E. McGee, Terrell R. Morton, Devin T. White, Whitney Frierson\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01614681231216518\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background/Context: The United States invests in STEM education, but this investment is racialized and political. The country wants to maintain global economic domination, but there are also calls to diversify the STEM workforce (Baber, 2015; Basile & Lopez, 2015; Vakil & Ayers, 2019). This context leaves Black and Brown people to navigate racially hostile, toxic, and oppressive STEM learning and working environments (Bullock, 2017; Erete et al., 2020; Wright & Riley, 2021). Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study: This conceptual paper offers strategies for institutionalizing equity ethics in STEM higher education. The paper attends to the core components of equity ethics and its possibilities while identifying structural constraints. Equity ethics is an equity-minded perspective that focuses on leveraging the multiple forms of knowledge associated with understanding and engaging the natural world to foster an oppression-free society that specifically enhances the lives of Black and Brown people. We also examine specific cases of STEM education and research scholars and practitioners who are committed to engaging and uplifting racially minoritized communities through the intersection of STEM and justice. Research Design: This conceptual paper takes a qualitative approach. It uses the existing literature to review the current state of diversity in STEM, the major components of an equity ethic, the structural and institutional barriers people of color face in STEM higher education, and how equity ethics may be institutionalized. In particular, we highlight examples of equity ethics in action to provide models for action and policy change. Conclusions/Recommendations: Institutionalized equity ethics at the mid-institutional level (e.g., departments and units) would require all faculty to mentor Black and Brown STEM students through critical transitions. We also recommend revising department- and unit-level policies and practices around access to resources that are critical for STEM achievement and knowledge production. Although expanding and sustaining financial investments in equity-focused endeavors is required, these investments must also come with the power and agency to transform institutional structures around STEM access, learning, and innovation. Transformation of top-level policies and practices could include changes to institutional admissions processes and ensuring that racist gatekeeping mechanisms are removed, while also requiring senior-level administrators to have training in racial justice ideologies and praxes. Building equity ethics into STEM higher education is essential to creating a more just and equitable STEM ecosystem.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48274,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Teachers College Record\",\"volume\":\"133 1\",\"pages\":\"108 - 139\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Teachers College Record\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681231216518\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Teachers College Record","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681231216518","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景/语境:美国投资 STEM 教育,但这种投资是种族化和政治化的。美国希望保持全球经济主导地位,但同时也呼吁实现 STEM 劳动力的多元化(Baber,2015 年;Basile & Lopez,2015 年;Vakil & Ayers,2019 年)。在这种背景下,黑人和棕色人种不得不在充满种族敌意、有毒和压迫的 STEM 学习和工作环境中摸爬滚打(Bullock,2017 年;Erete 等人,2020 年;Wright & Riley,2021 年)。目的/目标/研究问题/研究重点:这篇概念性论文提出了在 STEM 高等教育中实现公平伦理制度化的策略。本文探讨了公平伦理的核心内容及其可能性,同时指出了结构性制约因素。公平伦理是一种具有公平意识的观点,它侧重于利用与理解和参与自然世界相关的多种知识形式来促进一个无压迫的社会,特别是提高黑人和棕色人种的生活水平。我们还研究了 STEM 教育和研究学者及从业人员的具体案例,他们致力于通过 STEM 与正义的交汇点来参与和提升少数种族群体。研究设计:本概念性论文采用定性方法。它利用现有文献回顾了 STEM 领域的多样性现状、公平伦理的主要组成部分、有色人种在 STEM 高等教育中面临的结构性和制度性障碍,以及如何将公平伦理制度化。我们特别强调了公平伦理在行动中的实例,为行动和政策变革提供了范例。结论/建议:在机构中层(如院系和单位)将公平伦理制度化,将要求所有教师指导黑人和棕色人种的 STEM 学生完成关键的过渡。我们还建议修订部门和单位层面的政策和做法,以获取对 STEM 成就和知识生产至关重要的资源。尽管需要扩大和维持对以公平为重点的努力的资金投入,但这些投资也必须伴随着改变围绕 STEM 的获取、学习和创新的体制结构的力量和机构。高层政策和实践的变革可以包括改变院校招生程序,确保取消种族主义把关机制,同时还要求高层管理人员接受种族公正思想和实践方面的培训。在 STEM 高等教育中建立公平伦理对于创建一个更加公正和公平的 STEM 生态系统至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Accelerating Racial Activism in STEM Higher Education by Institutionalizing Equity Ethics
Background/Context: The United States invests in STEM education, but this investment is racialized and political. The country wants to maintain global economic domination, but there are also calls to diversify the STEM workforce (Baber, 2015; Basile & Lopez, 2015; Vakil & Ayers, 2019). This context leaves Black and Brown people to navigate racially hostile, toxic, and oppressive STEM learning and working environments (Bullock, 2017; Erete et al., 2020; Wright & Riley, 2021). Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study: This conceptual paper offers strategies for institutionalizing equity ethics in STEM higher education. The paper attends to the core components of equity ethics and its possibilities while identifying structural constraints. Equity ethics is an equity-minded perspective that focuses on leveraging the multiple forms of knowledge associated with understanding and engaging the natural world to foster an oppression-free society that specifically enhances the lives of Black and Brown people. We also examine specific cases of STEM education and research scholars and practitioners who are committed to engaging and uplifting racially minoritized communities through the intersection of STEM and justice. Research Design: This conceptual paper takes a qualitative approach. It uses the existing literature to review the current state of diversity in STEM, the major components of an equity ethic, the structural and institutional barriers people of color face in STEM higher education, and how equity ethics may be institutionalized. In particular, we highlight examples of equity ethics in action to provide models for action and policy change. Conclusions/Recommendations: Institutionalized equity ethics at the mid-institutional level (e.g., departments and units) would require all faculty to mentor Black and Brown STEM students through critical transitions. We also recommend revising department- and unit-level policies and practices around access to resources that are critical for STEM achievement and knowledge production. Although expanding and sustaining financial investments in equity-focused endeavors is required, these investments must also come with the power and agency to transform institutional structures around STEM access, learning, and innovation. Transformation of top-level policies and practices could include changes to institutional admissions processes and ensuring that racist gatekeeping mechanisms are removed, while also requiring senior-level administrators to have training in racial justice ideologies and praxes. Building equity ethics into STEM higher education is essential to creating a more just and equitable STEM ecosystem.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Teachers College Record
Teachers College Record EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
89
期刊介绍: Teachers College Record (TCR) publishes the very best scholarship in all areas of the field of education. Major articles include research, analysis, and commentary covering the full range of contemporary issues in education, education policy, and the history of education. The book section contains essay reviews of new books in a specific area as well as reviews of individual books. TCR takes a deliberately expansive view of education to keep readers informed of the study of education worldwide, both inside and outside of the classroom and across the lifespan.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信