Kaitlyn Coburn, Kris Troy, Carly A Busch, Naomi Barber-Choi, Kevin M Bonney, Brock Couch, Marcos E García-Ojeda, Rachel Hutto, Lauryn Famble, Matt Flagg, Tracy Gladding, Anna Kowalkowski, Carlos Landaverde, Stanley M Lo, Kimberly MacLeod, Blessed Mbogo, Taya Misheva, Andy Trinh, Rebecca Vides, Erik Wieboldt, Cara Gormally, Jeffrey Maloy
{"title":"Cisnormative Language and Erasure of Trans* and Genderqueer Student Representation in Biology Education Research.","authors":"Kaitlyn Coburn, Kris Troy, Carly A Busch, Naomi Barber-Choi, Kevin M Bonney, Brock Couch, Marcos E García-Ojeda, Rachel Hutto, Lauryn Famble, Matt Flagg, Tracy Gladding, Anna Kowalkowski, Carlos Landaverde, Stanley M Lo, Kimberly MacLeod, Blessed Mbogo, Taya Misheva, Andy Trinh, Rebecca Vides, Erik Wieboldt, Cara Gormally, Jeffrey Maloy","doi":"10.1187/cbe.24-01-0033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Trans* and genderqueer student retention and liberation is integral for equity in undergraduate education. While STEM leadership calls for data-supported systemic change, the erasure and othering of trans* and genderqueer identities in STEM research perpetuates cisnormative narratives. We sought to characterize how sex and gender data are collected, analyzed, and described in biology education research. We reviewed and coded 328 original research studies published in CBE-Life Science Education from 2018 to 2022. Studies often relied upon binary classifications and conflated sex and gender. For instance, terms used to describe sex, such as \"male\" and \"female,\" were frequently offered as gender options. Only 27 studies (8%) included trans* and genderqueer students in their analysis. Of those that excluded trans* and genderqueer students from analysis, only 23 (7.6%) acknowledged this as a methodological limitation. Further, there has been no temporal trend away from cisnormative language over the 5-year period we analyzed (OR = 1.0, <i>p</i> = 0.93). Our findings show the prevalence of cisnormative language and methodologies in biology education research and demonstrate a lack of representation of trans* and genderqueer individuals. Our results are a call for researchers to critically conceptualize whether and how they investigate gender data in future studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":56321,"journal":{"name":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","volume":"24 1","pages":"ar3"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.24-01-0033","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Trans* and genderqueer student retention and liberation is integral for equity in undergraduate education. While STEM leadership calls for data-supported systemic change, the erasure and othering of trans* and genderqueer identities in STEM research perpetuates cisnormative narratives. We sought to characterize how sex and gender data are collected, analyzed, and described in biology education research. We reviewed and coded 328 original research studies published in CBE-Life Science Education from 2018 to 2022. Studies often relied upon binary classifications and conflated sex and gender. For instance, terms used to describe sex, such as "male" and "female," were frequently offered as gender options. Only 27 studies (8%) included trans* and genderqueer students in their analysis. Of those that excluded trans* and genderqueer students from analysis, only 23 (7.6%) acknowledged this as a methodological limitation. Further, there has been no temporal trend away from cisnormative language over the 5-year period we analyzed (OR = 1.0, p = 0.93). Our findings show the prevalence of cisnormative language and methodologies in biology education research and demonstrate a lack of representation of trans* and genderqueer individuals. Our results are a call for researchers to critically conceptualize whether and how they investigate gender data in future studies.
期刊介绍:
CBE—Life Sciences Education (LSE), a free, online quarterly journal, is published by the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB). The journal was launched in spring 2002 as Cell Biology Education—A Journal of Life Science Education. The ASCB changed the name of the journal in spring 2006 to better reflect the breadth of its readership and the scope of its submissions.
LSE publishes peer-reviewed articles on life science education at the K–12, undergraduate, and graduate levels. The ASCB believes that learning in biology encompasses diverse fields, including math, chemistry, physics, engineering, computer science, and the interdisciplinary intersections of biology with these fields. Within biology, LSE focuses on how students are introduced to the study of life sciences, as well as approaches in cell biology, developmental biology, neuroscience, biochemistry, molecular biology, genetics, genomics, bioinformatics, and proteomics.