Identity Salience and Field‐Course Engagement: From Deficits to Assets

ABSTRACT In contemporary higher education, teachers and administrators must make choices about how best to allocate resources for maximum benefit. In many STEM fields, this has led to closer scrutiny of many costly offerings, such as laboratory and field experiences. In response, several investigators have highlighted the many educational benefits these high‐impact practices provide, while also shedding light on concerns related to diversity, equity and inclusion. Field courses are especially notable for disproportionately engaging students from high socioeconomic backgrounds, racial and ethnic majorities, and—in some disciplines—men. To address inequities in STEM, field courses should therefore be investigated to better understand students who are underrepresented in the disciplines—whether based on their nationality, language proficiency, socioeconomic background, race or ethnicity, their gender identity or sexuality, etc. Here we report on findings from a series of interviews in which students in an international, graduate‐level field course discussed which of their identities, either visible or hidden, were most salient in the field‐course context. Respondents reflected on how these identities served as either promoters or barriers to engagement in the course, and shared course interactions that intersected with these identities in either positive or negative ways. Our analysis of these interviews allowed us to identify several key themes, among them the idea that the interviews themselves are a type of pedagogical intervention that instructors could adopt to promote inclusion. By identifying how student identities interact with course practices to impact engagement, we can begin to outline best pedagogical practices for field courses. Thus, we can ensure investments in these experiences benefit all students and help to make STEM diverse, equitable, and inclusive.