“You Assumed That Everybody Was...”: Hermeneutic Injustice and Cisheteropatriarchy in STEM Coursework

Introduction

A small but growing body of research focused on the experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, intersex, and asexual (LGBTQIA+) students in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) fields has recently emerged in conversations about higher education, campus climate, and LGBTQIA+ students (Cech et al., 2017; Friedensen et al., 2021a; Hughes, 2017; Linley et al., 2018; Mattheis et al., 2019; Miller et al., 2021; Vaccaro et al., 2021). Broadly speaking, these studies have found that students with minoritized identities of sexuality and/or gender (MIoSG; Vaccaro et al., 2015) face marginalization and attrition from these fields; for example, Hughes (2018) found that LGBQ students are 8% less likely to persist in STEM. STEM spaces are also perceived by students with MIoSG as less safe than other spaces on campus (Linley et al., 2018). Many of these studies have also shown that students with MIoSG report feeling invisible in their STEM fields and being concerned about being out in STEM spaces (Bilimoria & Stewart, 2009; Cech & Waidzunas, 2011; Cooper & Brownell, 2016; Hughes, 2017; Mattheis et al., 2019). However, very few of these recent studies have focused specifically on STEM classroom experiences as a site of potential transformation.

In this chapter, we examine the ways that cisheteropatriarchy structures inclusion and marginalization in STEM fields in order to understand where and how transformation is possible for LGBTQIA+ students. Specifically, we explore instances of hermeneutic injustice in STEM coursework in the context of students with MIoSG. Fricker (2007) defines hermeneutic injustice as “the injustice of having some significant area of one’s social experience obscured from collective understanding owing to a structural identity prejudice” (p. 155) due to a general deficit in understanding. Epistemic injustice, which describes the systemic silencing and exclusion of knowledge produced by those in positions of alterity, allows us to identify hermeneutic injustice as one specific manifestation of cisheteropatriarchy in STEM. STEM classrooms specifically and coursework broadly represent key contact points in both the communication and potential normalization of STEM’s dominant ideological assumptions. Prior literature has shown that the classroom is a powerfully normative environment in STEM disciplines wherein participants learn about both a field’s culture and conceptualization of the scientific process (Calabrese-Barton & Tan, 2019; Handelsman et al., 2022; Johnson et al., 2015). Empirical findings about postsecondary learning environments also suggest that classrooms and coursework can actively marginalize students with MIoSG, but few studies have explored these findings in STEM environments specifically (e.g., Cooper & Brownwell, 2016).

This chapter draws on findings from a constructivist grounded theory study with 56 MIoSG STEM students that sought to answer the following research question: How do students with MIoSG majoring in STEM experience and navigate campus learning environments and their disciplines/fields? While this study’s broader findings focus on sensemaking related to STEM majors and environments (Vaccaro et al., 2021), this chapter examines classrooms and coursework as sites of disciplinary socialization, exclusion and inclusion, and potential transformation. To do so, we use Fricker’s (2007) epistemic injustice as a sensitizing concept. Specifically, our findings highlight how the normalization of cisheteropatriarchy precludes MIoSG students from developing and utilizing the very interpretive resources that could otherwise help them to make sense of their alterity within STEM fields. Highlighting this outcome as the result of specific choices made by instructors and peers reveals how STEM fields could be transformed to be less cisheteropatriarchical and, potentially, more inclusive of students with diverse genders and sexualities.