Unveiling Concealable Stigmatized Identities in Class: The Impact of an Instructor Revealing Her LGBTQ+ Identity to Students in a Large-Enrollment Biology Course

Student identities predict classmate and instructor fear of negative evaluation among undergraduates in large-enrollment introductory biology courses

Undergraduate biology students describe fear of negative evaluation (FNE), defined as a sense of dread associated with being unfavorably evaluated in a social situation, as negatively affecting their experiences in active learning courses. Yet, few studies have examined who is prone to experiencing FNE, the severity and duration of FNE, and whether the effects of FNE are experienced equally among undergraduates. To address these gaps, we surveyed 494 undergraduates enrolled in active learning introductory biology courses about their FNE as it relates to students in their courses (classmate FNE) and to their instructor (instructor FNE). Students reported higher instructor FNE than classmate FNE. Using linear regressions, we found that women and nonbinary students, persons excluded based on ethnicity or race (PEERs), continuing-generation college students, LGBTQ+ students, and non-native English speakers had higher instructor FNE than their respective counterparts. PEER students also had higher classmate FNE than white students. Women, nonbinary, and PEER students were more likely than men and white students to report a greater negative impact of FNE on their abilities to articulate their thoughts about science in class. This work highlights the importance of reducing FNE with the intent to create more equitable active learning biology classrooms.

Support from School Personnel and In-School Resources Jointly Moderate the Association Between Identity-Based Harassment and Depressive Symptoms Among Sexual and Gender Diverse Youth

A growing body of research has found that perceptions of social-emotional support from school personnel and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) in-school resources (e.g., gender and sexuality alliances, inclusive curricula, inclusive sexual education, presence of affirming adults) contribute to sexual and gender diverse youth's (SGDY) positive development. However, no research has investigated how support from school personnel and LGBTQ in-school resources might jointly modify the associations between SGDY's experiences with sexual orientation and gender identity (identity)-based harassment and mental health outcomes. Thus, the current study examined how school personnel support and LGBTQ in-school resources, together, moderated the association between identity-based harassment, depressive symptoms, and anxiety symptoms among a national sample of SGDY (N = 13,500, M age = 15.50, SD = 1.34). Multigroup path analysis revealed that for SGDY in middle school (i.e., 6-8) and high school grade levels (i.e., 9-12), school personnel support and LGBTQ in-school resources jointly moderated the association between identity-based harassment and depressive symptoms. Among SGDY who reported high levels of harassment, support from school personnel buffered the association between identity-based harassment and depressive symptoms. However, at low levels of harassment, it was a combination of high support from school personnel and LGBTQ in-school resources that was linked to the lowest levels of depressive symptoms. SGDY reported more depressive symptoms when they perceived low levels of support from school personnel, regardless of the concentration of LGBTQ in-school resources.

A Model for Emotional Intelligence in Biology Education Research

Informed by social science fields including psychology and public health, we propose a Model for Emotional Intelligence to advance biology education research in affective learning. The model offers a shared discourse for biology education researchers to develop and assess evidence-based strategies to perceive, use, understand, and manage emotions for students and instructors in life sciences classrooms. We begin by reviewing the connection between stress, emotional invalidation, Sense of Belonging, and Science Identity as it relates to emotions in undergraduate life sciences classrooms. Next, we highlight the impact that emotionally invalidating classroom environments have on science students' development of psychological distress, maladaptive coping, and high-risk behaviors. Assuming Emotional Intelligence can be taught and learned (i.e., the ability model of Emotional Intelligence), we develop a Model for Emotional Intelligence to advance biology education research in this arena. This essay aims to inform assessments of current and future interventions designed to counteract emotional invalidation and encourage the development of emotional management among students and instructors. In alignment with our collective effort to support student well-being in the life sciences, the study of Emotional Intelligence in undergraduate biology education has the potential to support student mental health as future scientists and health care practitioners.

Breaking Stereotypes: How Undergraduates' Life Experiences of Scientists Shape their Scopes of Possibility

Building on decades of scholarship critiquing scientist representation in classrooms and textbooks, the present study characterizes the lifetime experiences of undergraduate students regarding their perceptions of scientists and science identity. Informed by the theoretical framework of Cultural Learning Pathways (CLP), we conducted 31 semistructured interviews with undergraduates who completed six Scientist Spotlights (scientistspotlights.org), which are inclusive curricular supplements that feature counterstereotypical scientists. Despite decades of progress in curricular representation, our results revealed almost all students (94%, n = 29) recounted exposure to predominantly (if not exclusively) stereotypical scientists across social institutions (e.g., media, K12, universities, healthcare environments) throughout their lifetime, which limited their Scopes of Possibility to pursue science. All students (100%, n = 31) reported that Scientist Spotlights enhanced Scopes of Possibility for themselves and others from marginalized backgrounds to pursue science. Last, almost all students (97%, n = 30) shared characteristics they hoped to see when imagining Scopes of Possibility, emphasizing the need for a concerted effort to increase representation of counterstereotypical scientists across science curriculum and social institutions more broadly.

Disrupting the Master Narrative in Academic Biology as LGBTQ+ Ph.D. Students: Learning, Teaching, and Conducting Research

LGBTQ+ individuals face discrimination and stigma in academic biology. These challenges are likely magnified for graduate students. However, there have been no studies documenting the experiences of LGBTQ+ life sciences graduate students. To address this gap, we conducted an interview study of 22 biology PhD students from 13 universities across the United States who identify as LGBTQ+. We used the master narrative framework to interpret our findings. Master narratives are guidelines that dictate the "expected" and "normal" way one is supposed to navigate life. We considered how graduate students engage with the societal master narrative that treats cisheterosexuality as the norm, as well as the master narrative that expects biology to remain an objective, apolitical space. We found that LGBTQ+ PhD students recognize the anti-LBGTQ+ narratives in academic biology, which can result in instances of discrimination and encourage them to conceal their identities. However, participants pushed back against these master narratives. Graduate students described creating alternative narratives by highlighting how their LGBTQ+ identity has allowed them to become more inclusive instructors and better researchers. Some also purposely reveal their LGBTQ+ identity in academic biology, violating the master narrative that non-science identities should not be discussed in the life sciences.

"Broadening Perspectives Activities" Improve LGBTQ+ Student Experiences and Religious Students' Content Comprehension

Curricular content in undergraduate biology courses has been historically hetero and cisnormative due to various cultural stigmas, biases, and discrimination. Such curricula may be partially responsible for why LGBTQ+ students in STEM are less likely to complete their degrees than their non-LGBTQ+ counterparts. We developed Broadening Perspective Activities (BPAs) to expand the representation of marginalized perspectives in the curriculum of an online, upper-division, undergraduate animal behavior course, focusing on topics relating to sex, gender, and sexuality. We used a quasiexperimental design to assess the impact of the BPAs on student perceptions of course concepts and on their sense of belonging in biology. We found that LGBTQ+ students entered the course with a better understanding of many animal behavior concepts that are influenced by cultural biases associated with sex, gender, and sexuality. However, LGBTQ+ students who took the course with the BPAs demonstrated a greater sense of belonging in biology at the end of the term compared with LGBTQ+ students in the course without BPAs. We also show that religious students demonstrated improved comprehension of many concepts related to sex, gender, and sexuality after taking the course with BPAs, with no negative impacts on their sense of belonging.

Students respond positively to an instructor collecting and sharing aggregated class demographic data from a survey in a high-enrollment physiology course

The impersonal nature of high-enrollment science courses makes it difficult to build student-instructor relationships, which can negatively impact student learning and engagement, especially for members of marginalized groups. In this study, we explored whether an instructor collecting and sharing aggregated student demographics could positively impact student-instructor relationships. We surveyed students in a high-enrollment physiology course about their perceptions of their instructor 1) distributing a demographic survey, and 2) sharing aggregated survey results in class. We found that 72% of students appreciated the demographic survey, and 91% thought it helped their instructor get to know them. Further, 73% of students expressed that the instructor sharing aggregated demographic data in class positively impacted their overall course experience, and over 90% thought both the collection and sharing of demographic data were appropriate. Most students felt both parts of the intervention increased their sense of belonging in class, increased how connected they felt to their instructor, and made their instructor seem more approachable and inclusive, although the intervention also made some students feel more different from their peers. Women and nonbinary students felt the demographic survey increased instructor approachability more than men, and liberal students felt the survey increased instructor approachability more than nonliberal students. Compared to men, women and nonbinary students were more likely to report that taking the survey increased instructor inclusivity and made them feel less different from their peers. Based on these results, collecting student demographic information and sharing it in aggregate may be a practical, effective way to enhance student-instructor relationships.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This study examined undergraduate student perceptions of a high-enrollment physiology instructor collecting student demographics and sharing aggregated results to promote course inclusion. Most students perceived the collection and sharing positively, with women and nonbinary students, as well as liberal students, perceiving greater benefits from the data collection than their counterparts. Our results indicate that collecting and sharing in aggregate student demographics may be an effective way to enhance student-instructor relationships in high-enrollment science courses.

The upside to depression: undergraduates benefit from an instructor revealing depression in a large-enrollment physiology course

Undergraduates with depression report that they would benefit from science role models who also have depression. If biology instructors who have depression reveal it to their students, it could help meet this need. However, it is unknown how instructors revealing their depression would impact all undergraduate science students, not just those with depression, and whether it would cause some students to have a negative perception of the instructor. To address this gap, an instructor of an undergraduate physiology course revealed her depression to the whole class in less than 3 s on two occasions. Undergraduates were surveyed about whether they remembered the instructor revealing depression, whether they perceived it to be appropriate, and what impact it had on them. Of the 289 undergraduates who participated in the survey, 90.6% remembered the instructor revealing her depression. Seventy-two percent of those students reported that the instructor revealing depression had a positive impact on them, 21.3% reported no impact, and 6.7% reported a negative impact. Women were disproportionately likely to report that the instructor revealing depression had a positive impact on the student/instructor relationship and the instructor's approachability. LGBTQ+ students were disproportionately likely to report that the instructor revealing depression had a positive impact on the extent the classroom feels inclusive and students with more severe depressive symptoms were more likely to report that it normalized depression broadly and in the context of science. This work adds to recent studies highlighting the potentially positive impact of instructors revealing their concealable stigmatized identities to undergraduates in class.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This research highlights the potential for instructors with depression to have a positive impact on students in their college science courses.

Elevating Marginalized Student Experiences of Belonging in the Life Sciences: A Qualitative Case Study Approach

College students with identities traditionally marginalized in scientific disciplines are more engaged and more likely to remain in science if they feel that they belong in their science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) classes and departments. In this qualitative case study, we elevated marginalized student voices to learn how departmental experiences shaped their sense of belonging in curricular and co-curricular spaces. Our research team interviewed 27 undergraduate life science students at a large predominantly white, research-intensive university. Participants reflected on their lived experiences and feelings of belonging within a biology department and shared their perceptions of departmental efforts related to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Three themes emerged as being of value to undergraduate students while they navigated the sciences: 1) implementing inclusive pedagogies, 2) providing co-curricular resources and support, and 3) humanizing life sciences education. These stories illuminated the importance of authenticity and intentionality in the implementation of strategies related to these three themes. This study provides an example of the power of centering marginalized students' lived experiences to identify strategies that can be employed more broadly to improve our courses, our departmental cultures, and our institutional policies-strategies essential to supporting students with a diversity of identities in engaging, belonging, and persisting in STEM.

"Scientists are People too": Biology Students Relate More to Scientists When They are Humanized in Course Materials

Featuring scientists in classroom materials provides opportunities for students to relate to scientists as role models and see themselves in science. However, it is unclear what information students find most relatable when encountering scientists throughout their education. In this study, we manipulated the amount and type of information provided about scientists featured in biology courses. Within the context of activities focused on a scientist's research study and data, we provided students with either no personal information about the scientist (Control treatment), pictures of the scientist (Visual treatment), or pictures and humanizing details about the scientist (Humanizing treatment). We asked students to describe how they related to the featured scientist, and qualitatively coded responses. Results showed that students related to the scientist's 1) professional research interests (e.g., research topic, science as a career) and 2) personal information (e.g., life experiences, hobbies, personality characteristics, race/ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status). In addition, we observed differences in how students related to scientists across our treatments. Students were twice as likely to relate to featured scientists, and related in a greater variety of ways, when course materials included personal, humanizing information. We discuss implications for curriculum development and call for intentionality in how we present scientists throughout biology education.

LGBTQ+ faculty, queering health sciences classrooms: student perspectives

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer plus (LGBTQ+) students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) majors are more likely to drop out than their cisgender, heterosexual peers despite having equivalent grades and research exposure. It has been demonstrated that a sense of belonging, a very strong predictor of student retention, is low in LGBTQ+-identified STEM undergraduates. It has further been posited that faculty openness and authenticity can enhance a sense of belonging for LGBTQ+ students through the creation of an inclusive classroom culture. The authors of this article, three LGBTQ+-identified faculty in the health sciences department at Boston University, surveyed students enrolled in their courses to elicit student thoughts, feelings, and behaviors regarding the effect of faculty 1) sharing their identity openly in the classroom, and 2) actively working to create open, inclusive dialogue and space in their classrooms. Of 86 student participants across multiple classes, the large majority of students, both LGBTQ+-identified and non-LGBTQ+-identified, described feeling safe, included, and welcomed in the classroom. They described engaging more in peer-to-peer education and felt that instructor authenticity created a safe and inclusive classroom. A minority of LGBTQ+-identified students and non-LGBTQ+-identified students reported feeling unsure of voicing their opinions, for the former related to insecurity about being LGBTQ+ and the latter feeling a liberal bias existed in the classroom. Altogether, these results suggest a positive effect on student sense of belonging when faculty authenticity and intentionality create inclusive classroom environments in the health sciences.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Openness and authenticity of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer plus (LGBTQ+)-identified faculty in the health sciences positively affect students by helping them feel seen, welcomed, and included for both students who identify as LGBTQ+ and those who do not. Moreover, faculty openness fostered student action by encouraging them to have peer-to-peer discussions about inclusive language and engage more openly in classroom discussions. Creating academic job security for LGBTQ+-identified faculty to be open can enhance classroom culture, student engagement, and learning.

Beyond Gender and Race: The Representation of Concealable Identities Among College Science Instructors at Research Institutions

Concealable stigmatized identities (CSIs) are identities that can be kept hidden and carry negative stereotypes. To understand the potential influence instructors have as role models, we must first explore the identities instructors have and whether they disclose those identities to undergraduates. We surveyed national samples of science instructors (n = 1248) and undergraduates (n = 2428) at research institutions to assess the extent to which instructors hold CSIs, whether they reveal those identities to undergraduates, how the prevalence of CSIs among instructors compares to their prevalence among undergraduates, and the reasons instructors reveal or conceal their CSIs. The most common CSIs instructors reported were having anxiety (35%) and being a first-generation college student (29%). Relatively few instructors revealed CSIs to students. The largest mismatches of CSI prevalence were for struggling academically in college (-30%) and having anxiety (-25%); all mismatches grew when accounting for instructor CSI disclosure, highlighting that students perceive fewer role models of scientists with CSIs than actually exist.

How Do Students Critically Evaluate Outdated Language That Relates to Gender in Biology?

Cisheteronormative ideologies are infused into every aspect of society, including undergraduate science. We set out to identify the extent to which students can identify cisheteronormative language in biology textbooks by posing several hypothetical textbook questions and asking students to modify them to make the language more accurate (defined as "correct; precise; using language that applies to all people"). First, we confirmed that textbooks commonly use language that conflates or confuses sex and gender. We used this information to design two sample questions that used similar language. We examined what parts of the questions students modified, and the changes they recommended. When asked to modify sample textbook questions, we found the most common terms or words that students identified as inaccurate were related to infant gender identity. The most common modifications that students made were changing gender terms to sex terms. Students' decisions in this exercise differed little across three large biology courses or by exam performance. As the science community strives to promote inclusive classrooms and embrace the complexity of human gender identities, we provide foundational information about students' ability to notice and correct inaccurate language related to sex and gender in biology.

Few LGBTQ+ Science and Engineering Instructors Come Out to Students, Despite Potential Benefits

LGBTQ+ undergraduates have higher attrition from science and engineering (S&E) than straight and cisgender undergraduates and perceive that having LGBTQ+ instructors would benefit them. However, it is unknown how many S&E instructors are LGBTQ+, the extent to which they disclose this information to students, and how disclosure affects all students, both LGBTQ+ and non-LGBTQ+. In study I, we surveyed 108 LGBTQ+ S&E instructors across the U.S. to explore the extent to which they reveal their LGBTQ+ identities across professional contexts and why they reveal or conceal their identities to undergraduates. Overall, 75% of instructors came out to at least some colleagues but only 48% came out to any undergraduates. Instructors most commonly chose to conceal LGBTQ+ identities from undergraduates because they perceived their identities to be irrelevant to course content and anticipated negative student reactions. In study II, 666 introductory biology undergraduates were randomly assigned to evaluate one of two identical teaching demonstration videos except the instructor revealed her LGBTQ+ identity in one but not the other. We assessed differences in students' impressions of the instructor across conditions. We found no differences in most ratings of the instructor except participants reported higher rapport with the instructor when she came out.

Student perceptions of inclusive pedagogy in undergraduate STEM classrooms

In university STEM classrooms, the incorporation of inclusive practices improves student performance, decreases disparities in the academic success of underrepresented students, and increases student retention and persistence in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) programs. Inclusive pedagogical practices include effective instructional choices like active learning, providing rubrics, and other strategies that have been shown to support students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Additionally, explicitly inclusive practices such as addressing microaggressions and sharing pronouns can promote a sense of belonging for students. While a plethora of literature has shown these impacts and faculty have access to resources and training about inclusive pedagogy, we were interested in whether students are noticing these practices and how student identities impact their observations of instructional practices. We surveyed undergraduates (n = 74) from diverse STEM disciplines at a large land-grant university regarding their observation of 11 different inclusive pedagogical practices. Overall, students observed inclusive instructional practices more often than they observed explicitly diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)-related practices. For explicitly DEI-related practices, white students observed more practices than Students of Color. This suggests that more work needs to be done to train faculty in explicit DEI-related practices, especially with the goal of supporting Students of Color who have been historically excluded from STEM.

Women drive efforts to highlight concealable stigmatized identities in U.S. academic science and engineering

Concealable stigmatized identities (CSIs) are hidden identities that carry negative stereotypes and can result in a loss of social status if revealed. Instructors often choose to conceal these CSIs due to anticipated negative student reactions, yet revealing CSIs can have a positive impact on undergraduates. Women are generally more likely to reveal personal aspects about themselves in social situations, but may face greater consequences for revealing a stigmatized identity to students given their already marginalized position in academic science and engineering. Therefore, in this study, we were interested in understanding to what extent there are differences between men and women science and engineering instructors in (i) the representation of CSIs, (ii) their decisions to reveal CSIs to undergraduates in their classes, and (iii) their perceived stigma of CSIs. Based on a national survey of over 2,000 instructors in science and engineering from very high research activity doctoral institutions, we found that women were more likely than men to report having depression, anxiety, or a disability. Of instructors who held CSIs, women had 1.5x higher odds than men of revealing their CSIs to some undergraduates compared to no undergraduates and perceived greater stigma associated with all CSIs. Despite perceiving greater stigma associated with concealable stigmatized identities, women are more likely to reveal their CSIs to college science and engineering students, leading the way to a more diverse and inclusive scientific community by demonstrating themselves as role models for these identities.

Face negotiation in graduate school: the decision to conceal or reveal depression among life sciences Ph.D. students in the United States

Background

Depression is one of the top mental health concerns among biology graduate students and has contributed to the "graduate student mental health crisis" declared in 2018. Several prominent science outlets have called for interventions to improve graduate student mental health, yet it is unclear to what extent graduate students with depression discuss their mental health with others in their Ph.D. programs. While sharing one's depression may be an integral step to seeking mental health support during graduate school, depression is considered to be a concealable stigmatized identity (CSI) and revealing one's depression could result in loss of status or discrimination. As such, face negotiation theory, which describes a set of communicative behaviors that individuals use to regulate their social dignity, may help identify what factors influence graduate students' decisions about whether to reveal their depression in graduate school. In this study, we interviewed 50 Ph.D. students with depression enrolled across 28 life sciences graduate programs across the United States. We examined (1) to what extent graduate students revealed their depression to faculty advisors, graduate students, and undergraduates in their research lab, (2) the reasons why they revealed or concealed their depression, and (3) the consequences and benefits they perceive are associated with revealing depression. We used a hybrid approach of deductive and inductive coding to analyze our data.

Results

More than half (58%) of Ph.D. students revealed their depression to at least one faculty advisor, while 74% revealed to at least one graduate student. However, only 37% of graduate students revealed their depression to at least one undergraduate researcher. Graduate students' decisions to reveal their depression to their peers were driven by positive mutual relationships, while their decisions to reveal to faculty were often based on maintaining dignity by performing preventative or corrective facework. Conversely, graduates performed supportive facework when interacting with undergraduate researchers by revealing their depression as a way to destigmatize struggling with mental health.

Conclusions

Life sciences graduate students most commonly revealed their depression to other graduate students, and over half reported discussing depression with their faculty advisor. However, graduate students were reluctant to share their depression with undergraduate researchers. Power dynamics between graduate students and their advisors, their peers, and their undergraduate mentees influenced the reasons they chose to reveal or conceal their depression in each situation. This study provides insights into how to create more inclusive life science graduate programs where students can feel more comfortable discussing their mental health.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40594-023-00426-7.