Investigating the use of inclusive language surrounding sex and gender in Science teaching

Introduction: The LGBTQIA+ community has faced stigma in the past which is still being dismantled today. Tertiary science education involves discussions on identity and biological sex which include invalidating language for gender non-conforming people. Past studies have shown that a shift towards inclusive language, including new pedigree nomenclature and non-gendered terms were positively received by undergraduate students [1].
Aims: The aims of this study were to:
-Gain an understanding of who and where people are displaying their pronouns.
-Identify the level of comfort different gender groups experience with certain activities.
-Identify teaching approaches that are making individuals feel included or excluded.
Method: After receiving feedback from a pilot survey, the final survey was adjusted before distribution to staff and students in any area of Science at Monash University. Demographic data, relative frequencies of the responses to two Likert-scale questions were calculated and emergent thematic coding of open-ended responses was conducted.
Results: There was representation of many gender identities in the 113 participants who responded to the survey, including 20% of individuals whose gender does not align with their sex assigned at birth. Women and men were more uncomfortable with using other people’s it/its and xe/xir pronouns, as well as using non-gendered terms, with a much higher proportion of participants selecting “uncomfortable” or “very uncomfortable” compared to gender diverse participants. While individuals whose sex and gender do not align reported more frequently feeling uncomfortable or excluded by their peers and teaching staff in class, compared to cis-gendered individuals. Preliminary thematic analysis from the qualitative survey responses identified some predominant themes surrounding the experiences and perceptions of inclusive and exclusive teaching practices in Science.
Conclusion: The results suggest that a more welcoming teaching approach would involve less assumption of gender identity by prompting of displaying pronouns (although this must be optional), as well as less binary and cis-normative language use (instead, using “they” and non-gendered terms where applicable). A number of other recommendations for educators to make their teaching and curriculum more inclusive will be presented.

References:
1. Hales KG. Signaling Inclusivity in Undergraduate Biology Courses through Deliberate Framing of Genetics Topics Relevant to Gender Identity, Disability, and Race. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2020 Jun;19(2):es2. doi: 10.1187/cbe.19-08-0156.