Inclusivity

As participants of the scientific community, Team Saptasense has a responsibility to uphold the values of diversity, equity, and inclusion. To us, this means initializing efforts to promote these values in the local Rochester community, iGEM community, and scientific community at large.
We based our efforts on the dogma that promoting equity in our local communities will cultivate diversity, which will in turn promote more equity globally.



We chose to focus our efforts on one significantly underrepresented group in STEM: the disabled population.
Our inclusivity efforts were organized in a four-step process, shown below.

Step 1: Investigating Barriers to the Disabled Community



The first step in building a successful inclusivity initiative is to investigate barriers. This is especially critical when supporting the disabled community.

"If you've met one person with autism, you've met one person with autism."

Dr. Stephen Shore
Disabilities are diverse, and each disabled person’s experience may be vastly different from another’s. There is diversity within the experiences of one specific type of disability, but also between disabilities. This is further complicated by the concept of intersectionality: multiple identities interacting with one another. Therefore, we were careful to investigate the barriers to inclusion of the disabled community, while remembering that no one representative of the disabled community is capable of effectively communicating the experiences of the community as a whole.
In order to investigate the barriers of inclusion of the disabled community in STEM, we hosted two separate webinars featuring panels of disabled students and career professionals. Click on the headings below to learn more.

We first wanted to investigate the barriers to participation in STEM for our peers. For example, would there be any barriers to participation in STEM-focused classes? Are there any barriers to a research-intensive program such as iGEM? To answer these questions we hosted a public webinar featuring 3 undergraduate panelists. The selected panelists represented different disabilities, genders, and institutions.

Panelists featured
  • Liz Randolph, University of Rochester(she/her)
  • Anna Buttenwieser, Dartmouth University(they/them)
  • Lucy Goode, Earlham College(they/them)


During the panel, the following questions were discussed in detail:
  • What are your career aspirations and goals
  • Have you ever considered your disability while choosing your career?
  • Have you ever reconsidered or doubted your career choice due to your disability?
  • How has representation of people with disabilities in your chosen career affected your choice? Do you see many people with the same disabilities as you going into the same career?
  • Have you ever received accommodations (formal or informal)?
  • Have there ever been any barriers to receiving accommodations or asking for accommodations?
  • Do you currently do any research in a lab? Have you considered doing research in a lab? Why or why not?
  • Have you ever considered telling your Principal Investigator (PI) or Professor about your disability and the need for accommodations? Why or why not?
  • Have you ever talked to a boss about the need for accommodations?
  • Have you ever had a boss, professor or instructor that did an amazing job at improving access to coursework for you? How did they do it? How did they make you feel so accepted?
  • If you are applying for graduate school or medical school, do you plan on disclosing your disability? Why or why not?

After learning about the experiences of our peers, we wanted to expand our view of disability to established career professionals. While there tends to be resources for undergraduate students needing disability accommodations, there are less resources for career professionals. We therefore hosted a second webinar featuring STEM professionals.

Panelists featured

Our STEM Professionals Panel featured 3 separate individuals. Two of the individuals worked as professors at academic institutions. The final individual worked in industry. Out of respect for privacy, the names of the professionals have been left out, and the recording was not posted to YouTube.



During the panel, the following questions were discussed in detail:
  • Have you always identified as disabled? (both in the sense of when did you “become” disabled and what has the journey looked like of identifying with the word “disabled”)
  • How has being disabled interacted with your career?
  • What advice or experience do you have regarding declaring that you are disabled on applications to colleges and grad schools?
  • What advice would you give to PIs, professors, or managers on how to make STEM more accessible to the disabled community?


What We Learned



We learned that barriers to access to STEM are present at all stages of the career path. Barriers that were specifically present for undergraduate students included:
  1. having a professor/PI that is not accommodating
  2. having a professor/PI that isn’t comfortable talking about disability or diversity
  3. receiving formal accommodations is a difficult and often inaccessible process.
Barriers that were specifically present for STEM professionals included
  1. stigma associated with disability that results in others underestimating capabilities
  2. lack of formal accommodations, despite protection under the Americans with Disabilities act.
Something that stuck out to us throughout the two webinars was the significance of attitudes and beliefs. Many of the barriers that are present for the disabled community are rooted in misconceptions and a lack of knowledge. This helped to inform our initiative-planning activities.

Step 2: Designing Initiatives Thoughtfully



When discussing the topic of disability, it is imperative that we are sensitive to the culture, preferences, and needs of the community we are talking about. To be sure that we were sensitive to this, we ensured that a member of the disabled community was involved with our initiatives at every single step. Further, all of our events were made as accessible as possible, including hiring a professional live closed captioning service for our webinars. To read more about our efforts, see the sections below.

When doing inclusivity work on behalf of a community, it is important to include that community when planning initiatives. This ensures that efforts do not stray from the interests and objectives of the community itself.
One of the reasons why we chose to focus on the disabled community is because one of the members of Team Saptasense identifies as disabled. By having a member of the team that is a member of the underrepresented community that we were targeting, this meant that we were able to gain the opinions and experiences of a member of the community at each stage of the initiative design process. In particular, all webinars hosted by Team Saptasense were chaired by the disabled individual, the design of the “self-reflection rubric” for professors was compiled by the disabled individual, and the organization of the youth education activity was done by the disabled individual. This ensured that our advocacy on behalf of an underrepresented group was in tune with the group’s ideals.

When hosting events on topics of accessibility, it is absolutely essential to make sure that the events themselves are accessible. We took steps to ensure that each event that was hosted was accessible.

Table 1.
Event Accessibility Considerations
Disabled Undergraduates in STEM Panel
  1. Live closed captioning for hard-of-hearing or deaf participants
  2. Closed captioned YouTube video recording
  3. Event reminder email for those with executive functioning difficulties
  4. Provided questions in advance to panelists to reduce possible anxieties
  5. Microphones used to enhance audio quality and reduce background noise for sensory-disabled participants
Disabled STEM Professionals Panel
  1. Live closed captioning for hard-of-hearing or deaf participants
  2. Event reminder email for those with executive functioning difficulties
  3. Provided questions in advance to panelists to reduce possible anxieties
  4. Microphones used to enhance audio quality and reduce background noise for sensory-disabled participants
General Disability Education Webinar
  1. Engaging activities to involve audience participation and enhance learning opportunities
  2. Large-text slides and quality audio for visually impaired or blind participants
  3. Live closed captioning for hard-of-hearing or deaf participants
  4. Closed captioned YouTube video recording
  5. Ample visuals as well as text on slides for various learning slides
  6. Microphones used to enhance audio quality and reduce background noise for sensory-disabled participants
“How to make STEM Accessible” Webinar
  1. Engaging activities to involve audience participation and enhance learning opportunities
  2. Large-text slides and quality audio for visually impaired or blind participants
  3. Live closed captioning for hard-of-hearing or deaf participants
  4. Closed captioned YouTube video recording
  5. Ample visuals as well as text on slides for various learning slides
  6. Microphones used to enhance audio quality and reduce background noise for sensory-disabled participants
Youth Education Activity
  1. Slides provided to give visual direction for learning
  2. Engaging activities to involve student participation and enhance learning opportunities

Step 3: Expanding Access to Science



After fully investigating and educating ourselves on the barriers to access to STEM of the disabled community, we sought to begin to ameliorate and remove the barriers. Removing barriers requires two parts: (A) Education and Changing Mindsets and (B) Providing Directive and Resources.

Figure 3.

A. Education and Changing Mindsets

After talking with the disabled undergraduate panelists, we became aware that there are many misconceptions about disability. These misconceptions often result in ableism and unfair treatment or bias against people with disabilities.

Common misconceptions:

  • Getting disability accommodations is an easy and accessible process
  • Accommodations are “unfair” to others
  • People with disabilities cannot do science at the same level as their non-disabled peers
  • Charity can be confused with inclusion
  • Universal Design of classrooms makes the class too “easy”

Therefore, the first step in expanding access to science is to eliminate these misconceptions. We hosted a series of educational events targeting all ages: young and old. (see sections “General Education Webinar”, “iGEM Diversity and Inclusion Committee Webinar Collaboration”, and “Fostering Youth Learning”).

B. Providing Directive and Resources

After our educational initiatives, we sought to expand access further by providing tangible recommendations on how to improve accessibility. For this objective, we produced a “how to” webinar, on how to make labs, research, and classes more accessible. We also authored a “self-reflection tool” for Professors to evaluate how accessible their class is.

Did Our Initiatives Improve Access?

Table 2.
Initiative Measurable Outcome
General Education Webinar Attendees had the option to complete a reflection form at the conclusion of the webinar. Here are some of the responses that we received:

Q: Will you be incorporating anything from the Webinar into your activities as a professor? (as a PI, course professor, or otherwise)

A: “I will certainly make sure to continue providing captioned videos of class lectures and not make attendance mandatory. For the undergraduate research expo (the major symposium for undergrad research presentations at UR), I will make sure that there is an option for presenting virtual posters. For the Discover Grant research fellowships for summer research at UR, I will provide applicants the opportunity to describe any accommodations they may require for their research experience, and will communicate this information with the PI.”

Q: Did you learn anything from the Webinar? If so, what did you learn? A: “I have learnt that even a small difference in ability should be accounted and everyone must be given an equal opportunity to express their fullest potential.”
A: “I learnt that accommodating for someone's basic needs doesn't mean sacrificing your own.”
Fostering Youth Learning Survey Feedback
“How To Be More Accessible” Webinar Q: What are some tangible things that you will do to make STEM more accessible to the disabled community? A: “When I notice any aspects of school or work life that may be inaccessible to people with disabilities, I will bring that up with my peers as well as others who may have more power to make changes. If I am ever in a position where I am a mentor or manager to other people, I will make it clear to those people that I appreciate the importance of accommodating their needs and that I am open to having conversations about how to best do that.”
A: “I will be less afraid to talk to my peers about their disability or to ask them how I can help them be successful in whatever we are doing together.”

After learning about the barriers to the disabled community, members of Team Saptasense wanted to communicate our knowledge and learned material to the iGEM, University of Rochester, and scientific community. Therefore, we organized a “general education” webinar focused on the following introductory topics:
What is disability justice? What is the correct way to refer to the disabled community? What is the Social Model of Disability? What is Universal Design?
The webinar was co-facilitated by a disabled member of our team and Thomas Ledbetter, an autistic disability advocate.
During the panel, the following concepts were discussed in detail:
  • The “Leaky STEM Pipeline” results in losses of the proportion of disabled students at each stage of the educational system.
  • Disability can be defined by the medical model and the social model.
  • There is a difference between inclusion and charity.
  • Ableism in STEM can look like many different things (questioning “how disabled” someone is, questioning if someone really needs accommodations, standing-only events like conferences, lack of hybrid options)
This year, the iGEM Diversity and Inclusion Committee put on a series of webinars on the theme of Mental Health in STEM. Upon learning of Team Saptasense’s efforts to organize our own webinars, the committee invited us to their meeting. During this meeting a collaboration was discussed and Team Saptasense was able to share what we learned from putting together our webinar series. We decided to collaborate on the “Neurodiversity” webinar. One of our team members was featured as the co-facilitator for the session.

Central to the idea of improving inclusion in STEM is communicating the value of diversity to youth. We aimed to educate youth on the definitions of disability, and why accommodations are important and fair. In order to communicate complex concepts like disability and inclusion to youth in an age-appropriate way, we curated our own interactive activity and delivered the activity to a group of 9 to 11 year olds at the Rochester Museum and Science Center.
Figure X.

The Activity/Lesson Plan

  1. Start by asking children, “what does disabled mean?”, “do you know someone who is disabled?”
  2. Meanwhile, pass out 2 plastic cups to each child, one filled with water and one empty.
  3. Give each child a “tool”. Each child should have a different tool. Students cannot switch tools. Examples of “tools” are listed below, but can include anything that is safe to be used with water.
    1. Plastic “pipette”
    2. Pencil
    3. Tin foil
    4. Toothpick
    5. Plastic mini dinosaur
    6. Fork
  4. Outline the rules of the activity: The goal of the game is to transfer as much water as you can from the full cup to the empty cup in 30 seconds using your tool.
  5. Time the children for 30 seconds.
  6. Use a graduated cylinder or scale to determine which child transferred the most water.
  7. Award a prize to the child who transferred the most water.
  8. Have a discussion. Ask the children: “How do you feel?”, “Do you think that activity was fair? Why or why not?”
  9. Ask the children how this activity relates to disability!
  10. Have a discussion on what accommodations are. What kind of accommodations would make this game more fair (extra time, etc)? Do you know anyone in your school who receives accommodations? Why are these accommodations fair?

Reflections

Overall, the activity was very successful in that the children enthusiastically participated in both the discussion questions and the activity itself. The children successfully and independently made the connection between how the water activity related to disability. One aspect in which to improve the activity is to avoid the use of water, which is very messy and can be spilled. In the future, beads can be transferred between cups instead to decrease the mess. Alternatively, the activity can be organized outdoors.

We developed a “rubric of accessibility” featuring principles of Universal Design. Universal Design is the school of thought in which environments are made more accessible to all, regardless of age, disability, or other factors. This is in contrast to other schools of thought in which disabled people come across barriers to access and must request accommodations to improve access. Theoretically, Universal Design eliminates the need for accommodations because the entire environment was designed with access needs in mind. For example, one of the most common accommodations in the classroom is extended time on exams. In a Universal Design classroom, ideally, all students would have ample time (~24 to- 48 hours) to complete the exam so that time is not a factor in completion, regardless of disability. More examples of how to make a classroom more universally accessible are included in our “rubric”. (see section entitled “See Our Rubric”)

Based on this framework of accessibility, we developed a self-reflection rubric tool that professors can use to evaluate how accessible their classrooms are. To ensure that our rubric would be both well-received and helpful, we discussed the idea with an access specialist from our University’s Office of Disability of Resources. We also discussed the rubric with a professor in the Department of Biology, Dr. Dan Bergstralh. From these meetings, it became clear to us that professors often actively seek out opportunities to improve access for students of various backgrounds and abilities, and thus our rubric would be well-received. We also learned that professors benefit most from direct, tangible feedback that allow them to make concrete action steps. In this way, the “check-list” like format of our rubric meets the needs of the target audience.

One of the most common questions that we received throughout all of our inclusivity efforts was “How can I be more accessible?”. We therefore decided to curate an entire webinar around this topic, focusing on STEM environments. Since the audience of our webinar was a mix of Principal Investigators, Professors, undergraduate students, and iGEM participants, we provided a diverse array of recommendations.
One of the biggest takeaways from this webinar was “realize your power”. Many of the undergraduate students that we talked to for our inclusivity efforts felt that since they aren’t a Professor teaching a class or running a lab, there is little that they can do to improve accessibility. In this webinar we specifically addressed this misconception. Even as a teaching assistant, club president, or tutor, you can create an environment of accessibility and awareness.
The following topics were discussed during the webinar:
  • Accessibility in the Classroom:
    • Examples of inaccessibility:
      • long classes or teaching labs
      • lack of chairs
      • lack of virtual options
      • not allowing make-up dates/options
    • Examples of how to make class more accessible:
      • always offering virtual options
      • offering lecture material in multiple formats
      • built-in lab make-up dates
      • reducing high-stakes exams
  • Accessibility in the Lab:
    • More obvious ways to make the lab more accessible:
      • tube openers
      • ergonomic pipettes
      • chairs
      • floor mats
      • sensory-friendly goggles
      • label makers
    • Less obvious ways to make the lab more accessible:
      • Scheduling breaks in long lab meetings
      • Visually describing graphs and providing background information in presentations
      • Having an official lab office for breaks
      • Maintaining and defining clear and reasonable expectations
      • Lab outing with accessibility considerations

Step 4: Build On Our Work



The process of iGEM is not linear, but circular. Each year, teams work to improve previous team’s parts, develop newer solutions to the same problems, and build on each other’s work. It is critical to apply these same concepts to work on inclusivity. We encourage future teams to utilize the lessons that we have learned in our efforts, and to apply the materials that we have created in their own local communities.

References



  1. CAST (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Retrieved from http://udlguidelines.cast.org
  2. Booksh, K.S., Madsen, L.D. Academic pipeline for scientists with disabilities. MRS Bulletin 43, 625–631 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1557/mrs.2018.194