Abstract
Compared to other groups, relatively less research has specifically addressed the retention of Latinx students in STEM disciplines. These students face many negative stereotypes about their group, especially related to their academic success, yet there is limited research regarding how microaggressions, subtle or ambiguous discriminatory behaviors, targeting Latinx students in engineering education settings impact their experience in those programs. Guided by Sue’s definitions and taxonomy of microaggressions, Critical Race Theory and Latino Critical Theory, the purpose of the current study was to answer the following research questions: 1) What microaggressions do Latinx engineering undergraduates experience in an engineering education environment? and 2) How do these microaggressions impact Latinx engineering undergraduates’ academic well-being, as defined by their academic self-efficacy and academic performance?
Keywords
A phenomenological design was used to determine the microaggression experiences of Latinx students in higher education engineering programs. Qualitative data was collected using a semi-structured interview protocol composed of open-ended questions. Latinx students’ experiences with microaggressions were largely guided by the misperception of Latinx students’ foreignness and negative stereotypes regarding Latinx people. Despite the racial diversity of Generation Z, Latinx people’s status as the largest minority group in the United States, and the increasing need for racial diversity in engineering, Latinx students remain devalued and ostracized in the engineering education environments. However, Latinx students have developed several strategies in order to persist in their majors despite their poor treatment.
INTRODUCTION
Much research has demonstrated that engineering education programs are less likely to retain women and students of color at every point in the pipeline (Blackburn, 2017; Carver et al., 2017; Drew et al., 2016; Estrada et al., 2016). Education research has also explored the experiences of STEM undergraduates of color to determine the challenges students face as well as what factors assist in persistence in these majors (Hernandez et al., 2017; Peralta, et al., 2013). Although Latinx people have grown to be the largest minoritized group in the Unites States, they continue to remain a small percentage of engineering students (Garcia-Felix, 2019). Research regarding the experiences of Latinx engineering undergraduates has often grouped Latinx students with other engineering undergraduates of color, and while these groups have much in common, in order to design programs to attract and retain Latinx students in engineering, the distinctive experiences of these students, especially barriers to success, must be given adequate study (Espinoza, 2013; Rincón, et al., 2020).
The impact of systemic prejudice against underrepresented students has been widely studied and because traditional forms of racism and sexism have become taboo (Van den Hurk et al., 2019), many researchers are now considering underrepresented engineering undergraduates’ experiences as the targets of modern discrimination (McConahay, 1983) in the form of gendered and racial microaggressions. Microaggressions are ambiguous slights, usually due to implicit bias, targeting people with marginalized identities that leave the victim unsure of how, or unable to respond (Sue et al., 2007). Over time, the seemingly small and inconsequential behaviors are likely to impact victims’ self-efficacy and self-esteem. Microaggressions must be studied in an engineering education setting because these programs tend to be predominantly White and male.
The current study assessed Latinx engineering undergraduates’ experiences with microaggressions in an engineering education setting guided by Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Latino Critical Theory (LatCrit). These theories explain how normalized racism in the United States impacts the outcomes of underrepresented groups across domains. LatCrit goes further to focus on the experiences of Latinx people in the United States as the targets of prejudice due to factors such as language and immigration status. These theories elucidate how the use of microaggressions continues despite the rejection of direct prejudice in higher education (Pérez Huber, 2010).
Latinx Engineering Students
As previously mentioned, much research has shown that there are a disproportionate number of White women and underrepresented groups in STEM disciplines at the collegiate, graduate, and professional levels (Hernandez et al., 2017); however, few studies have been done to specifically study the experiences of male and female Latinx engineering undergraduates with fewer papers focusing solely on Latinx engineering undergraduates’ experiences. Latinx students’ experiences are unique in that they do not share the model minority status of their Asian peers (Chavous, et al., 2004; Kiang et al., 2017), they are not perceived to share the American status of their African American peers (Pérez Huber, 2010), and they have been historically derided as a group out to “steal” American jobs, while simultaneously being perceived as lazy and unintelligent (Garcia-Felix, 2019; Hernandez et al., 2017). These stereotypes have been compounded by the focus of the Trump administration on building a border wall between Mexico and the United States, attempting to erase the cultural uniqueness of Mexico and other Latin nations by referring to all Latinx people as Mexican, and by branding immigrants from those nations as criminal (while there are no similar stigmas targeting Canadian immigrants; Newman et al., 2018; Pérez Huber, 2010). Further, Latinx students are an ethnic group and not a racial group, meaning that they can identify both as Latinx and as a racial group, such as Black, White, or mestizo, and may also identify with a Latin American nation of origin.
The negative stereotypes about Latinx people perpetuated in the United States especially marginalize them in educational settings. Speaking English as a second language (for some), and a history of being relegated to physical labor-intensive exploitative work in the United States is erroneously confounded with a lack of intelligence (Peralta et al., 2013; Carrasco, 1998). Many Latinx people are also more likely to live in low-income households than their White (non-Latino) counterparts (Murphey et al., 2014), which is correlated with a lack of educational resources and under-preparedness for college (Garcia-Felix, 2019; Peralta et al., 2013). Even in an era when traditional or direct discrimination is largely against the law, these stereotypes thrive and are likely to divert Latinx students from engineering majors in the first place, interfere with the retention of students in these programs and/or decrease well-being, academic self-efficacy, students’ belief in their ability to complete academic tasks, and academic performance for these students (Elias & Loomis, 2000; Hernandez et al., 2017; Peralta et al., 2013).
Microaggressions
Sue’ taxonomy of racial and gendered microaggressions.
Existing research on Latinx students’ experiences with microaggressions has found that these students are the targets of racial microaggressions. Yosso and colleagues (2009) found that institutional microaggressions, specifically a lack of acknowledgment of cultures other than White culture on campus, including the lack of racial/ethnic diversity of the faculty, led to feelings of isolation and hopeless in the Latinx students. They also found that students were often the recipients of interpersonal microaggressions and racist jokes. Harwood et al. (2012) found that Latinx and other students of color experienced racial microaggressions in residence halls at a predominantly White institution (PWI). These microaggressions were mostly in the form of racial segregation of the dorms and denigration of the dorms that housed more underrepresented groups than White students.
In her case study focusing on six Latinx students transitioning into a Midwestern PWI, Minikel-Lacocque (2013) found that the students were targets of racial microaggressions from peers and people across the small college town in which the university was located. The Latinx students felt isolated from and ostracized by their White peers due to their Latinx identity. They also faced negative jokes and nicknames, primarily targeting Mexicans. These experiences led one student to contemplate dropping out of the school. Latinx students who attended a historically Black college/university (HBCU) also reported being the targets of racial microaggressions. These incidents were usually perpetrated by Black students or Black people near the campus. Being starred at and the use of negative stereotypes targeting Latinx people made the students feel unwanted on campus (Palmer & Maramba, 2015).
Isolation and ostracism are recurring themes in the literature regarding the use of racial microaggressions against Latinx students. McCabe (2009) found that Latinx students felt isolated from their White peers, and her findings also included gendered racial microaggressions in that Latinx women were frequently the target of sexually objectifying microaggressions that branded them as sexually permissive and exotic. Specifically focusing on female engineering undergraduates, Camacho and Lord (2011) found that Latinx women experienced similar microaggressions as their White and Asian female peers in engineering, which suggested that women were not as capable in engineering as men, but Latinx women further believed that people were particularly surprised that they were engineering students because they were Latinx. McGee (2016) argued that the rejection of cultures other than White in STEM, the lack of faculty of color in STEM departments, as well as the racist belief that students of color are underqualified and incapable of succeeding in STEM allows for the use of racial microaggressions against Latinx students which leave them feeling unwanted and undervalued in STEM disciplines. The previous findings of the use of microaggressions targeting Latinx students and the experiences of Latinx engineering undergraduates in programs where they are a racial minority can be explained by CRT and LatCrit.
Critical Race Theory and Latino Critical Theory
CRT draws from several domains to explain racial disparities in the United States, as well as what measures must be taken to eradicate these disparities. The most relevant aspects of CRT regarding the use of racial microaggressions targeting Latinx engineering undergraduates are likely the positions that 1) racism is the United States has been normalized and is ubiquitous and 2) the intersectionality of race and other marginalized identities alter the ways in which racism is carried out. CRT therefore suggests that the racist experiences of women and men of color, though similar, are distinctive (Delgado et al., 2012; Pawley et al., 2018; Peralta et al., 2013; Yosso et al., 2009).
LatCrit further emphasizes the experiences of Latinx people by underscoring how nativism combines with racism to impact Latinx people’s experiences in the United States. Nativism is prejudice against those individuals who are perceived as foreigners and therefore a threat to one’s culture and values. Nativism illustrates why the issues of language and immigrant status are additional challenges for Latinx people when facing prejudice (Peralta et al., 2013; Pérez Huber, 2010). CRT and LatCrit suggest that in order to address Latinx students’ experiences with microaggressions, educators must address the inherent nature of racism in higher education, must acknowledge the distinct experiences of men and women (as well as other marginalized identities), and recognize the additional possible concerns that Latinx student face compared to other students of color.
Research Aims
The lack of gender and racial diversity in engineering has been a concern for more than two decades. As a discipline contingent upon problem-solving, creativity and innovation, it has been found that diverse backgrounds and experiences serve to increase the United States’ global competitiveness in engineering and other STEM disciplines. In short, the success of students of color in engineering is paramount to the success of engineering in the United States (Peralta et al., 2013). The efforts to recruit, retain, and graduate students of color in STEM is ongoing but remain challenging due to the magnitude and pervasive nature of systemic racism. As the largest and still growing underrepresented group, the participation and success of Latinx students in STEM disciplines must be achieved (Hernandez et al., 2017). The purpose of the current study was to determine 1) what microaggressions do Latinx engineering undergraduates experience in an engineering education environment? and 2) how do these microaggressions impact Latinx engineering undergraduates’ academic well-being, as defined by their academic self-efficacy and academic performance?
Methods
A psychological phenomenological approach was used to examine Latinx students’ experiences as the targets of racial and gendered microaggressions as engineering undergraduates (Creswell & Poth, 2018). Using a semi-structured interview protocol, students were asked several questions about their positive and negative experiences addressing race and gender in engineering education environments such as the classroom, labs, and other places on campus. The purpose of the interviews was to allow students to explain their experiences without using a forced-choice format in order to understand students’ experiences in their own words (Delgado et al., 2012; Pawley et al., 2018; Peralta et al., 2013; Yosso et al., 2009). The Principal Investigator trained graduate and undergraduate researchers in open coding, using Sue’s taxonomy of microaggressions as codes. Each researcher then independently coded the data before meeting as a group to discuss the coding with a final codebook agreed upon. Axial coding was then used to identify emergent themes. For the purpose of this paper, only data collected from Latinx students will be discussed.
Participants
Researchers
There were five senior personnel and three junior personnel on the research team. Four of the five senior personnel contributed to current paper. The first author of this paper is a Black social psychologist and Co-PI on the current study. She is currently employed at an HBCU and attended an HBCU as a graduate student. She has previously researched what factors lead to the persistence of African American and Latinx engineering undergraduates attending PWIs, what factors impact the academic identity of Black female engineering undergraduates and is currently partnered with interdisciplinary faculty across multiple minority-serving institutions on STEM education studies regarding undergraduate research training and the effectiveness of STEM curricula. The second author is a White female civil engineer employed at a PWI and the lead PI at the PWI on the current study. She has previously researched knowledge seeking in engineering organizations and identified gender’s role in shaping how people seek knowledge. This previous work provided preliminary results and established the rationale for the current study. The third author is a White male political scientist employed at a PWI and Co-PI on the current study. He previously researched group aggression. His research identified how group identity and culture may shape aggression, and through cross-case comparison, validated the theory across 15 countries. The fourth author is a Black female environmental engineer employed at an HBCU and the HBCU lead PI on the study. She has over 15 years of experience working with minority, first-generation students, low-income, students with children, and students with disabilities to pursue degrees in engineering. As the PI for a Department of Education Grant since 2012, her team has provided mentoring, training, and support to help students from these underrepresented groups in engineering by providing support and advising to address the micro- and macro-aggressions that dissuade students from completing undergraduate degrees and pursuing graduate studies. The final senior team member and Co-PI is a Black female sociologist employed at a PWI. She has examined the theoretical application of multicultural feminism and intersectionality across regions within the United States. She has conducted pilot studies of gender differences in career role competence among engineering majors at a large Midwestern university. Two graduate students and one undergraduate were members of the team as well. There was a Black female counseling student who attended an HBCU and a White female policy analyst who attends a PWI. The undergraduate was a Latinx male who also attends a PWI.
Institutional Profiles
Institution demographics.
Participants
Participant demographics.
Materials and Procedures
Interviewers used a semi-structured interview protocol to determine participants’ experiences with microaggressions using open-ended questions that allowed for additional probing lasting approximately 15 minutes to 1 hour. Participants were first asked short introductory questions about their university and major in order to develop a rapport, such as Why did you decide to attend [University Name]? Participants were then asked about their positive and negative experiences with race and gender on campus in and outside of the class room: Can you recall an instance in class or outside (but related to school) when your race or ethnicity was generally addressed? Participants were also asked questions regarding the impact of their experiences, such as Do you believe the negative experiences you mentioned above have affected your academic self-efficacy (your belief that you can do well academically)? If so, how so? and Do you believe the negative experiences you mentioned above have affected your academic performance? If so, how so? Finally, participants were asked Would you characterize any of your experiences as microaggressions? If they were unsure of the definition of the term microaggression, they were given the definition and examples (Sue et al., 2007). Participants were asked this question last in order to avoid influencing their memory and interpretation of their experiences, while also determining if they themselves characterized their experiences as microaggression experiences. See the appendix for the full interview protocol. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Participants were interviewed by either a Latinx man, a Black man, Black woman/women, or a White woman with efforts made to match the race and/or ethnicity or gender identity of the interviewer with that of the participant when possible (Ganga & Scott, 2006). This was done in order to foster rapport between the interviewer and the participant to help participants to feel comfortable sharing information they may have felt was personal or sensitive.
Data Analysis
Interview transcripts were checked for errors by two members of the research team. The PWI PI organized two sessions on qualitative coding. The first session focused on identifying common patterns in the data (e.g., type of microaggressions). The first step of coding used opening coding. The codes were aggregated according to the categories of Sue’s (2010) taxonomy. The coding framework was created in a word document and included definitions of microaggressions, the type of microaggressions, and a quote for each type. The Undergraduate Research Assistant (URA) and a Graduate Research Assistant (GRA) manually coded the interviews by adding new codes that were not included in Sue’s (2010) taxonomy. The GRA and the PI did approximately five iterations to refine the codes and assure that each quote aligned with the appropriate code. The second session included moving to formal qualitative coding in Nvivo 12 after the abovementioned document was agreed upon. The URA and GRA met weekly on their own prior to meeting with the PI biweekly. In their separate meetings, the research assistants compared the coding and identified discrepancies in their coding. During the biweekly meeting, the PI and research assistants went through the report, discussed, and reached a consensus on the coding. The use of negotiated agreement yielded 100% interrater reliability (Garrison et al., 2006). Axial coding was used to determine the emergent themes to create a clear narrative of Latinx students’ experiences (Bringer et al., 2006; Hutchison et al., 2010). The themes were discussed and interpreted by the Principal Investigators, Co-Principal Investigators, and graduate researchers in the preparation of research reports.
Results
Participants’ responses demonstrated that both male and female students’ experienced microaggressions driven by negative stereotypes about Latinx students, especially those regarding intelligence and academic success. The following themes emerged from students’ reports: Disconnected, Worth Less, Observations, Relationships and Resiliency, and Systemic Issues.
Disconnected
As found in previous research, many Latinx students felt that they were isolated from their peers. In the current study, students’ responses included several racial and/or gendered microaggressions that told a story of students feeling as if they did not belong, or were disconnected from their engineering undergraduate peers because of their Latinx identity and/or their gender. Some of these reports coincided with Sue’s (2010) alien in own land, a microinvalidation, in that students were perceived as being from outside of the United States, but also as not belonging as engineering students due to their race and/or ethnicity or gender, and criminality/assumption of criminal status, a microinsult. Students were also the targets of microassaults.
Alien in Own Land
Rosa, a female Venezuelan Industrial Engineering major attending the PWI, felt like she often could not relate to the conversations of her White male peers. This disconnection became a microinvalidation, alien in own land, when she noticed that her White male professor would not approach her or her Black female partner when checking in with students on their projects. Rosa said: I felt like when it came to a lot of the lab practice, my professor would … walk around and check on people to see if they needed help. And it wasn’t necessarily like, oh, I raised my hand and then he comes, but it was more like being involved without being asked. So he would never check on us and we were clearly not doing as well as everyone else. … Now, and I guess, [on] many occasions, I did raise my hand and he came over, but it was never … part of what he would do [without my asking]. And I felt like he would do that with other people. Not saying that’s necessarily because I was a girl and …me and my partner were girls, and we’re people of color. I’m just saying that they had … a next level bond with him that we did not have. Yeah, I guess maybe it was due to [the fact that] he already knew these students pretty well and he was just it was natural for him to just approach them.
In her explanation, Rosa stated that she was not sure why the professor did not approach her, but also explained that she and her partner were the only women (of color) in the course. Rosa also pointed out that she and her partner were not doing well, which indicated their need for additional help. Rosa’s experience may have been heightened by her identity intersectionality, while her uncertainty is a characteristic of microaggressions.
Maria, a female Puerto Rican Mechanical Engineering major, also attending the PWI, experienced the microinvalidation when she was told by a professor that engineering was not for her. I’ve had two woman professors; one told me that I should reconsider being an engineer. … I always went to her office [to ask questions about the coursework] and I felt like there was more to it. And there was … a professor [in another] engineering class [who did the same] … I have [a] Puerto Rican friend [that’s] a girl. She had the same response from [the professor]. So, she also told us you should change your life. This is not made for you. … [S] … knew that we were minorities. … [T]here [have also] been … comments from her [about Chinese people].
Emilia, a female Latinx Computer Science major attending the HBCU, also reported feeling like an outsider in her work groups due to her gender. Definitely when it comes to like group work within … my major, a lot of people … I think, … see me as an outsider, so often group work is hard, getting people to work with me [is hard]. And then once we’re working, I’m very … detail focused and [about] getting stuff done. … I don’t think people like that, and I don’t know if that’s because I’m a girl and I’m like bossing them … I try not to be too bossy, but also get stuff done. … [W]hen you are kind of bossy, they don’t want to do it anymore. It is just … confusing how to handle that situation because … it’s a group grade. So I have to stress about it too, and push my teammates, but I don’t know if [they don’t want to work with me] because of my gender or just because it’s … schoolwork and they don’t wanna do it.
Isabella, a female Latinx Civil Engineering major also attending the HBCU, said that her peers mentioned to her that she was the only female student in the work group, a comment that can be considered a microinvalidation, though Isabella reported that it “just came up.” Carlos, a male Construction Engineering major at the PWI, had a similar experience, but regarding his ethnicity, and unlike Isabella, reported negative affect as a result. When I came first came to [this university], … I knew [it] was a [predominantly] White institution and all. I’m from Des Moines, … so [the city] was pretty diverse. … [C]oming here was a pretty big difference. … I think my first class, I walked in, and I didn’t really notice it ‘til someone else said it. I think it was a learning committee system, wasn’t it? I was the only student that was, I think there was only two other females and the rest were, you know, White males, and I was the only [person] of color. Probably that’s the one time I felt like, I don’t know, … I don’t belong, … it was really a different experience for me.
Carlos also noted that when he was treated poorly by a group member due to his ethnicity, his academic performance was negatively impacted, “because when people do things like that you kind of want to stop participating.”
Jorge, a male Puerto Rican (discipline unspecified) engineering major attending the PWI, compared his experiences in diverse groups versus groups dominated by White males. I felt like a lot of the projects I’ve done, whenever I got peer evaluations … when I was in groups with other people of … different races and ethnicities, I’d always get rated like super high in peer evaluations. Whenever I was in a predominantly White group and I did the same amount of work, I always got lower peer evaluations. I was always seen … have to justify myself more around there. At least here at [this university] I’ve noticed that.
Jorge went on to say: But whenever I started giving ideas [in groups], giving, like, really good pitches that people went through and it was time to discuss … [a group] … leader, I offered [to become the leader], but they automatically shunned it out. And I asked why. They are like, “Oh it’s just that we know this guy a little bit better. That’s it.” This is also the guy that I heard a year ago that made … racist comments … [W]ith that project, I did a lot of work as well, and then, … I feel because of my race, it didn’t count as much to them. Even though some of the ideas they did go with when they had really good ones, they decided to go with other ones just because it was my voice that was [giving the good ideas].
Although many of the previous students felt negative affect when it was pointed out to them that they were the only Latinx student in a course, Nicolás, a Mexican Civil Engineering major attending the HBCU, reported that in class, “They were just asking … how does it feel to be basically Mexican in a predominantly Black school, but that was basically it.” Nicolás appeared not take offense, saying, “I mean, it’s not awkward for me or anything. I mean, I’m pretty open if you ask me, I’ll tell you … it’s not something I guess I’m hiding or anything.” Though given that Nicolás mentioned this happening more than once, the query may have been a microinvalidation that emphasized his status as being the only Latinx male in many of his engineering courses.
Students also had to endure microinvalidations in the form of jokes as it pertained to their ethnicity and national origin. Guillermo, a Mexican and Puerto Rican (discipline unspecified) engineering major attending the PWI, was the subject of jokes and inquiries regarding the combination of his physical appearance and his ethnicity. He explained, “[M]y friend and I, we … went out and it was for Halloween. … [W]e were dressed up and this one guy walked past us and said, ‘What are you two supposed to be, two Mexicans?’” Guillermo also stated, “Another instance where I was talking to my good friend right outside … and a car went by and they asked if we both played soccer [because of] what we looked like. So, yeah, so definitely multiple times … [F]or sure.” Additionally, Jorge was “jokingly” told, “Oh, [Jorge], your family’s going to have to jump the wall.” While Mateo, a Mexican Construction Engineering major attending the PWI, recounted his friends telling him, “Oh, you’re in construction engineering because you’re Mexican, ha ha,” this microaggression was also told as a joke, but manifested more like the microinsult, ascription of intelligence (in this case, the assumption that Mexican students are less intelligent than their White peers), rather than the microinvalidation alien in own land.
Santiago, a Puerto Rican Mechanical Engineering major attending the PWI, reported an alien in own land incident with an administrator instead of a peer. I remember this one time I was speaking with an administrator and I’m like, I know this person, so I’m sure she didn’t mean that but, … we were having a meeting about an issue and she asked a question about something, and I gave … a one or two minute answer to her, … just explaining what I think we should do about this issue that we were discussing. … [T]he first thing she says once I’m done is, “Oh, can I just say that your accent is so beautiful … Oh my God, … I love how you speak English.” And it was like, I don’t know, it’s just like I know she didn’t mean that because I know her but it’s also, … I feel like you didn’t hear … the elaborate answer I just gave to you about what we should do about X or Y issue.
Miguel, a Mexican and Puerto Rican Computer Science major attending the PWI, also recounted a story in which an administrator was the perpetrator targeting his peers (and students of color in general). Students Against Racism… had a talk with the president about changing [a hall’s] name… once and for all to something else. My friend, who … is a really strong advocate in that group was in the room where all the students were talking [to the president]. … They were talking to her about changing the name and … she was very reluctant to change it. … [T]hey were pointing it out … look at the history, look at the books … it’s all there. … This person … was not all that you think she is. Just because she stands for feminism doesn’t mean that … it can just dismiss everything else that she stood for. … Hearing that … was kind of a shocker.
In another encounter, Miguel, who was also born in the United States, was told to “go back to [his] country,” an incident which emphasized his own status as an alien in his own land.
Criminal Status/Assumption of Criminality
Criminal Status/Assumption of Criminality tends to assume that men of color, specifically, are criminals or have a criminal background. Santiago also told of an instance when he ran for student government with a Black male student as his running mate. I was running in a student government election in the past. … [O]bviously I’m Latino, and one of the things that my opponents were doing against me as a Latino male was making this story of me being a rapist. And that sort of, like, goes in line too with, you know, the stereotype of Latino men being rapists and such. And so it was completely false but it was just something that they were perpetuating throughout, even their social media as well as, … on campus where they vandalized, like, some of my posters and signs that were promoting myself as a candidate for the student government and writing “rapist” on top of them and things of that nature. … [M]y running mate who was also a person of color, he was a Black male, and they were doing similarly to what was done to me. But with him, since he was a Black male, he was a “woman beater.” So they created this story about how he has beaten his girlfriends in the past and things like that.
Santiago reported that these events led to a sharp decline in his academic self-efficacy, his academic performance, and his mental health. These microaggressions shared features with microassaults. Regarding microinsults, the assumption that both a Latinx man and a Black man have a criminal history fit Sue’s (2010) theme, but because these instances purposefully targeted these men to prevent them from being elected to student government in a way in which the men were not able to directly respond to the perpetrator (through social media and defacing campaign posters), these microaggressions were conscious and meant to hurt these men without the perpetrators having to take responsibility in a face-to-face confrontation.
Microassaults
Jorge, who was also perceived as Black, was also the subject of microassaults in the form of racial slurs and jokes that usually target Black Americans. He was called the racial slurs on campus. He also reported, “I played intramural basketball this year and I was just playing basketball and I blocked this guy’s shot. He’s just, like, ‘Man, dude, it’s only because you’re black that you can jump that high.’” Jorge added: You just hear … a lot of different slurs outside, and in the classroom it’s a lot more reserved. But it would be more of … jokes, like, “Oh, you don’t know how to swim. Watermelon.” Stuff like that. And then like the Hispanic side, like, “Oh, chips and, like, you want some chips-- like, give me some chips and salsa” or some stuff like that. And then, like, sombreros and stuff.
Santiago, who was also perceived as Black by peers, explained, “Freshman year, coming back from a fraternity party, I was walking around Greek land and I was with another Puerto Rican friend of mine. And this group of boys in front of a porch yelled the ‘N-word’ at us.” Miguel, Guillermo, and Jorge, also mentioned incidents in which posters and chalkings supporting White supremacy appeared across campus. These incidents made the students in the study feel as if they did not belong among their White peers.
The students felt that these microassaults were the result of increased racism across the United States due to the Trump Administration’s immigration policies and derogatory comments (Pierce et al., 2018). Jorge attributed jokes about his family jumping the wall to Trump while Miguel stated that people were more comfortable with being openly racist during Trump’s presidency. Although she attended the HBCU, Emilia also believed Trump’s presidency had changed people’s behavior. I think … everything that’s happening with Trump and everything like that, a lot of maybe not necessarily nice comments are being seen as more OK to make because of what is happening. … [A] lot of people think it’s OK to ask me like, “Hey, are you an undocumented person,” or “Are you an immigrant?” … Which I think it’s rude; it’s none of your business. And I have no problem with talking about it, but … people … don’t even know me most of the time, and they ask me something like that. … I don’t think it’s OK.
Worth Less
Many students reported that they felt undervalued compared to their White counterparts in their classes and labs. Some of these reports corresponded with Sue’s second class citizen, pathologizing communication styles, and traditional gender role prejudicing and stereotyping, microinsults. Students mostly received this treatment from other students; however, there were instances in which professors and authority figures conveyed this message to students as well. Santiago reported feeling that he was undervalued compared to his White peers. He felt this was only due to his Latinx identity, that is, his accent and his physical appearance. Though he did not give specific examples, he also reported feeling negatively judged by others, and that he had to work twice as hard to be as successful as his White peers.
Second Class Citizen
Mateo stated he was valued less, “…[S]ometimes people do think I’m worth a little less because I’m Mexican and engineering, you know, even though I’m a White Mexican. I tell them I’m Mexican. This is [when] like the opinion lowers a little bit,” and the target of the racist jokes mentioned above. Guillermo heard comments from peers that students of color only received scholarships because of their race or ethnicity, not their intelligence. Jorge had a similar experience: [M]y freshman year I went to the … Career Fair and I was able to get an internship. Super blessed to be able to get that opportunity. And I was super excited and I shared it with my friends. I’ve really worked hard on … researching and the company itself. And then when I told them, they are like, “Oh, you know why you got it, right?” I was like, “No.” They [were] like, “Oh you just had to meet their demographics. That’s the only reason why you got it. Because of your race, maybe they had to add more … Black males, Latino males in there, and that’s the reason why you got it.” I was like, “No, I think I … tried.” They’re like, “Yeah, I mean maybe you did a little bit, but it’s because of … who you are.” So, yeah, that was kind of a bummer.
These incidents are all examples of the microinsult second class citizen. As previously mentioned, though he did not think his input was any less than his peers, Jorge also frequently got low peer-evaluation scores, which he felt was a microinsult due to his ethnicity. In every case, the participants were treated as if they or their group, Latinx people, were less than their White (non-Latinx) counterparts.
Pathologizing Communication Styles
Many students explained that they felt uncomfortable speaking Spanish around their White peers. The students gave several examples that ultimately suggested that speaking Spanish was considered inferior to English or unacceptable. Miguel could not recall any specific instances regarding speaking Spanish, but stated that when he and his friends were in class speaking their “native tongue,” they feel like they were looked at differently, “We know that … there’s at least one person … that will look over in a weird [way].” Emilia explained that students who spoke English as a second language were more likely to feel worth less than those who spoke English as a first language. [P]eople not thinking you’re smart enough in the classroom … affects me more … because then it’s like they’re really just valuing … what you know, …who you are, and how you are able to relate yourself because I do … think I’m very well spoken, but I do have a hard time remembering certain words in English or saying certain words in English. Often people take that as I’m not smart enough and that hurts more than any … offhanded comment about my gender or my ethnicity. … There’s definitely been times in … classes that are harder and the English becomes … a barrier. … [I]t does affect [my academic performance] sometimes because … it scares me a lot to go talk to professors because I have a hard time communicating sometimes when it comes to things that I just learned, … so I don’t go to office hours because I’m scared of that. So I [having a hard time learning new words in English] has affected me …
When Emilia discussed the language barrier, the treatment she received from others aligned with the microinsult ascription of intelligence, when the barrier was language, not intelligence. The belief that she would be belittled by peers for incorrectly pronouncing words impacted her academic performance. In another instance, related to language, when a White male fellow teaching assistant heard Juana, a Mexican Civil Engineering major attending the PWI, and her friends having a conversation in Spanish, he approached them and asked them to speak English. I was … sitting in a computer lab talking to my friends in Spanish and we were just … chilling, minding our own business. I TA (teaching assist) for a class in the civil engineering department. … I didn’t even notice that … he was there, but there’s another TA who … stands up and … was like, “Speak English por favor.” And I was like, “Nobody was talking to you,” … I turned around and I was like, “Shut the fuck up, no one was talking to you.” And he was like, “Oh Little Miss Attitude.” And I was just like, “I’m going to leave.” So then I … told our supervisor and she was all like, “Yeah, I’m going to talk to him and … let him know that that’s super inappropriate … that’s unbelievable … [Y]ou guys are supposed to be leaders, [etcetera].” And she was like, “I got to go figure out what I have to do.” And I was like, “Okay.” And she was like, “I’ll report it to the Office of Equal Opportunity.” And I was like, … “I will too.” … [I]n the beginning, she seemed like really supportive, [but] as … we were going through it and … there were going to be consequences for him, then she [said], “Well, you know, I don’t want to go down that rabbit hole,” type shit. So it’s always like, “Yeah, we’re going to support you until there’s, like, real life consequences for people.”
The behavior from the male peer was clearly that of pathologizing communication styles, suggesting that speaking Spanish was unacceptable, even when the conversation did not (intend to) include him, while the supervisor’s behavior also constituted a microinvalidation because Juana’s experience was nullified by the supervisor’s lack of action (Sue, 2010).
Traditional Gender Role Prejudice and Stereotypes
Women were likely to be the victims of traditional gender role prejudice and stereotypes in an engineering education context. Emilia reported that male peers often believed that she did not have skills, such as coding, because she was a woman: Mostly peers [discuss gender in class] especially when it comes to … coding. I don’t know why, but boys think that I wouldn’t learn how to code or wouldn’t understand something especially [be]cause … I feel like girls are more hesitant to talk in the classroom. Therefore we’re seen as [if] we know less. And that’s come up like several times because I tend to talk less in the classroom which is … not necessarily because of my gender but just because [of] the way I am; … I like to listen more. And then, once I have … an idea, I talk about it. So they think that I don’t know something because I don’t necessarily like talk all time. But I don’t know if that’s my gender, which sometimes it does feel like it or if it’s just my personality that affects that.
When asked at the end of the interview whether or not Emilia would categorize any of her experiences as microaggressions, she pointed out that particular experience. There’s a T.A. [that] helps us … work through problems … and we were coding this thing, and I knew how to code it. But he was like, [I]t’s not going to work that way because you don’t ask questions in class and you don’t participate as much in class. So you must be wrong.” But I was right. … I feel like he wouldn’t have told that to … a guy friend of his because a lot of participation [may mean] you’re more extroverted. I feel like participation doesn’t necessarily show whether you know something for sure. And so I feel like that comment was maybe a bit of [an] act of [a microaggression] towards me.
Juana reported that group members targeted her with traditional gender role prejudice and stereotypes when they would check on her answers to problems because she was a woman. Juana also felt worth less than her male and White peers when doing a group presentation: … [O]ur team was … five White guys, … a White girl, … me and another Mexican girl. … I did the structural engineering component and … one of the White guys was the architect, and they were like, “When you do your presentation, not everyone has to speak.” But, … I would think that … structural architecture and … whoever was the … manager would be the people to speak. And then … they were like, “Oh, we’re presenting,” and it was three White guys. And I was just like, “Well, now there’s three women on your team that aren’t speaking,” … And then … they were like, “We’ll add a speaker. … We’ll add the White girl,” and I was just kind of like, “All right, that’s fine. Just do whatever you want.”
Juana’s experience initially targeted her gender, but then she felt targeted due to her gender and race when a White girl was chosen to present, which would suggest the microinsult second class citizen. Together, these experiences emphasized that engineering is a White male dominated space and that engineering undergraduates of color are likely to be treated as worth less than White males, and in Juana’s case, specifically White males and White females.
Observations
As can be seen in the previous results, both male and female participants reported many incidents in which they felt they were the targets of microaggressions. These incidents clearly demonstrate the normalization of microaggressions, especially in predominantly White male settings. Moreover, microaggressions were so pervasive in students’ lives that they were also cognizant of those that targeted other people. Some of the young men in the sample reported gendered microaggressions targeting their female peers, even when the women did not acknowledge them or were not even aware of them. When participants could not recall any microaggressions toward themselves, they reported when they happened to other students of color.
Microaggressions Targeting Women
When the men were asked if they had had (positive or negative) conversations about their gender in class, many of them offered examples of the disparaging experiences of their female counterparts. These microaggressions spanned many of those labeled in Sue’s taxonomy. Carlos, Guillermo, Jorge, and Santiago mentioned the experiences of women in engineering. Santiago reported an instance when an alum perpetuated the microinvalidation, alien in own land, toward the women in the course. So this professor wasn’t an actual professor at Iowa State, he was … an invited lecturer, whatever you call that. He was just an [alum] that they brought in to give the class. There was one part of the class where he was discussing … professional attire. And I remember that there were women in the room but he only spoke about the men, about what men should wear. … And then one of the male students actually raised his hand and says, “Can you please speak about female attire since we have women in the room and women watching online” because it was an online class as well. And he sort of … was taken aback, like, “Oh, yeah, sorry I really can’t speak about that. I don’t really know about women attire or, like, and how women should dress.”
Santiago added that the same professor also made inappropriate jokes (the microinsult sexual objectification) that sexualized women: And there were a couple of times where … some jokes he would make were … sort of … crossing or close to a line. I remember … an activity [where we were learning] about how to find faults in designs or in ideas; we were talking about teleportation just like… a stupid example to do it. And he said-- I don’t remember how it came up, but I remember him saying … “Oh, you know, we got to be careful because y’all don’t want to teleport into Britney Spears’ bedroom all of a sudden.” … [N]obody laughed, but it’s… sort of like … he’s kind of an old dude so he probably has a conception that … it’s okay to say those type of things, but [it’s not].
When he explained how gender was discussed in engineering, Guillermo stated that a professor used the microinsult, traditional gender prejudicing and stereotyping, against his twin brother, also a STEM student. [M]y brother was on a group project and he was on a team. It was … two guys, maybe two girls, or something, and the professor had told my twin specifically, “How do you feel that a girl is doing better than you on this project?” And my brother did not take that very lightly because we were raised to not treat women that way. So that was [a] pretty bad … comment he made. So my brother was pretty upset.
Jorge also overheard a conversation in class between male peers in which they professed to only want to work with males because they felt males were the hardest working and more likely to know what they were doing, also traditional gender prejudicing and stereotyping targeting female engineering undergraduates. Jorge explained an instance when a female student of color who was a member of his work group sent a text to the men in the group to let them know they had treated her unfairly, likely by way of the microinsults, ascription of intelligence and traditional gender prejudicing and stereotyping. I’ve had one experience where I was working with a female and I was treating her fairly, but I think some of the other students weren’t, and she was also of minority race. So she … sent … a huge text in the group saying, like, “Listen, I’ve done all this work, [but] you guys didn’t appreciate me because I’m … a minority [and] a woman.” And I sat down with her and I talked to her. I was like, “Is there anything I can do? Is there something I’ve done that made you feel that way?” She [was] like, “Oh no, it’s not you. It’s the other people I messaged, it was meant for them, but she didn’t want to … make a separate Group Me (type of message).”
Although these men reported the instances they observed, it is important to note that Nicolás’ made an admission that suggested that he did not agree with people adhering to non-traditional gender roles, which suggests that identifying as a Latinx male does not make one immune to targeting others with gendered microaggressions. I’m Mexican, so we’re pretty conservative, I guess, about gender. … I don’t feel like it’s that big of a deal to express your opinion, but some people are still pretty sensitive about that … Or … it’s more they are really open minded and that if I don’t agree with that, I mean I’ll state it, but some people don’t like that.
Though he did not address his experiences as directly as Nicolás, Mateo’s narrative also suggested he might find himself as the aggressor in some gendered and racial microaggression incidents. When asked if he felt it was difficult to discuss gender or race in school, Mateo stated that people can be “touchy” when discussing these topics. Some people are extremely touchy with talking about gender with … gender binary and all this other stuff. I’ve met a lot of people where I assume their gender and they get really mad about it. And so I don’t know, sometimes it feels like I’m walking on eggshells. … Yeah, some people are also really touchy about their race. So if you assume the race, they’ll also be touchy about it. You know, if they were African-American, they don’t want you saying certain stuff because they just make assumptions about what you’re saying and you also make assumptions about them, so.
Microaggressions Targeting Other Latinx Students
Although Carlos reported experiencing racial microaggressions, he seemed very hesitant to do so. Before giving examples of his own experiences, he was quick to deny experiencing any gendered insults or microaggressions, but hesitated when discussing racial microaggressions. He reported, “I’ve definitely heard things, other people; maybe they get excluded from groups and stuff.” Miguel also reported hearing about others’ negative experiences regarding their race or ethnicity. Carlos and Miguel’s reports of others’ experiences are likely true, but may also be a part of the narrative they tell themselves to help better cope with any microaggressions they might face. Because microaggressions are ambiguous, they can be dismissed as behavior less egregious than direct discrimination, and therefore minimal (Sue et al., 2007). These students’ initial reports of negative incidents happening to someone else might be an example of trying to cope with their own negative experiences.
Relationships and Resiliency
The participants of the study reported many instances of microaggressions, but they also described the various relationships that provided them with support systems. Many students relied on their families and/or sought out similar peers and professors informally or through university organizations. Students also explained the other strategies they employed to remain resilient and persistent in taxing majors while facing the challenges of navigating peers’ and professors’ implicit biases. Despite their negative experiences, every student interviewed reported that they intended to become an engineer.
Family, Professors, and Peers
The students who had been the target of racial or gendered microaggressions reported speaking with family about their negative experiences. Guillermo had a close relationship with his twin brother. Jorge spoke to his parents regarding his friends’ insinuation that he only received a coveted internship because he was Latinx, “I talked to my parents about it after that and they’re just like, ‘It’s just who they are. They didn’t get it, so they’re trying to justify it.’” He also spoke to professors regarding negative experiences. Isabella discussed how she overcame her own low self-efficacy when she entered college and did poorly as a first semester freshman. She did not specify that her low self-efficacy was due to any microaggression experiences, but her account emphasizes the roles that professors and peers can play in increasing students’ resiliency. [M]y freshman year I was a terrible student. … I just didn’t believe in myself very much. And so my grades tanked. I didn’t focus very much on my academic career. I was just here out of obligation … I didn’t do well at first. And the interactions that I had with my professors and with my peers … made me feel so much better and so much more comfortable here. [Those interactions] made me feel like I really wanted to do more and to be better. And so, second semester I got straight A’s and I think I’ve been doing pretty good ever since. … [A] collection of events [made the difference]. … I went to [some of my Physics professors’ offices] to grovel and they tutored me … [T]hey helped me see things from their perspective, … to feel like I was really immersed in the… material, and to feel like I understood things way better than I ever have before in any other educational experience. That is what really made me feel good. And then let me try to think of another example. Yeah, that’s it. It’s just a learning process.
As previously mentioned, Isabella may have encountered microaggressions due to her gender, but when asked if she had ever felt as if she had been overlooked as a woman in her engineering program, she responded, “I’ve had a fair amount of opportunities here.”
Most students reported having underrepresented friend groups. They were able to discuss any disparaging experiences with these students. Many students also belonged to clubs on campus involving Latinx students, or other underrepresented groups. Carlos discussed a group to which he belonged: We just meet once a month. … [I]t’s for Hispanic males … [W]e sit and it’s a chance for us to interact with our professors. So there’s professors that go. … It’s run by [a] professor, but the invites [are for] students, graduate students and professors. So you get to go and you get to interact … with professors, graduate students and other people. You know that they are the same or similar background. … [It] includes pretty positive things; they embrace culture … where they are from.
Rosa was a member of a student organization that was primarily composed of Black students. Juan, a Latinx, Chemical Engineering student attending the PWI, participated in a program for Latinx students which enabled him to network with other Latinx engineering students.
Strategies of Resilience
Other than speaking with others, Rosa, despite getting frustrated and privately crying, tried to rationalize with herself that she was fine and could handle the negative experiences, “…I do cry a lot on it sometimes when I’m … super frustrated, but I was just … [spend time] repeating to [myself] that it's fine.” Carlos, Mateo, Juan, Guillermo, Nicolás, and Alejandro reported ignoring the negative encounters. When asked if he had ever thought he had been excluded as a student of color, Carlos said: I personally try not to pay attention to things like that. And … even small details, maybe sometimes it happened but, I just didn’t really pay attention to it. I don’t know. I just try not to let things like that affect me. I haven’t really noticed anything.
Alejandro, a Mechanical Engineering major attending the HBCU, did not report having negative experiences due to his ethnicity or gender in his engineering program. He said he was a positive person, and if faced with negative experiences, he was likely to ignore them. Miguel said he had “built a tolerance towards negativity,” he “brush[es] things off,” and added: I like to … separate those things from my performance because I know that when it comes to my performance in school … I know that I’ve been … able to just focus on the task at hand … When I don’t perform … to my liking … I know that I can attribute it to just me not performing well due … to being lazy or procrastination… because it comes from me, not because those things affected … me.
Miguel also directly confronted his White friends when they made it clear they supported the Trump administration which regularly demoralized Latinx people. They aren’t bad people … I’ve talked to them about [voting for Trump]. … Maybe …he’s not super direct about it sometimes, but … you know what he stands for, and how do you think … that affects me? … The way that they see it is more as … more in the sense that well… the economy is better … so … why complain?
Guillermo and Jorge focused inward when facing negative experiences. Guillermo concentrated on his pride in himself: I was kind of taught to be proud of who I am. And … I learned to adapt to [being a different ethnicity] and go into a college where it’s kind of similar to where I grew up (predominantly White). … And yeah, [negative encounters] definitely affected me in the moment but I’m able to brush it off my shoulder pretty quickly….
Jorge made a similar statement: [I]f I hear those subtle … microaggressions that are blatantly obvious, … racist comments, what I do to cope with it is … understand exactly who I am, what I’ve done and what I’m going to achieve in the future. So it really helps build me up and move forward.
Uncertain, but Persistent
Two students reported that there were times they felt hesitant to become an engineer. Santiago planned to become an engineer at the time of the interview, but worried that it would be hard for him to advocate for Latinx people in the workplace: I want to be an advocate and … promote equity in the workplace. But at the same time, I feel like in a sense we are trained to … be … selective when we stand up … Because if I come in guns blazing and be like … that’s not inclusive, … you should use these words better, [etcetera] … then, … I’ll be marginalizing [people of color in] the workplace more … because I’m a person of color. So … it’s sort of like … trying to find … how can I be the best advocate because at the same time … if I just burn out right off the start, then I won’t be able to make any change. But, if I’m selective and I know when to speak up, then slowly over time I can be an agent.
Rosa wondered if changing her major to engineering from marketing had been a wise choice, but planned to become an engineer at the time of the interview. It’s just easier to think, “Oh, if I had done marketing, it would have been easier,” but that’s not something I know. … Maybe I would be better, maybe not. But you know, when you’re in a position that you’re frustrated, you’re like, “I do not get this” or “I don’t know if I can endure this,” maybe go back and say, “It would have been easier if I had not gone to college at all.”
Systemic Discrimination
Students acknowledged experiencing microaggressions, which are interpersonal instances of implicit bias, but also noted that the issues they faced as Latinx engineering undergraduates were systemic, beyond their everyday interactions. The students mentioned instances when systemic racism as well as systemic sexism in engineering education impacted their experiences as Latinx engineering undergraduates. Systemic racism and sexism assist in the perpetuation of racial and gendered microaggressions in White male dominated spaces, and are therefore important to acknowledge. Addressing systemic discrimination allows for addressing individual biases that lead to the use of racial and gendered microaggressions toward Latinx students in engineering programs.
Race and/or ethnicity
Diego, a Mexican Civil Engineering major attending the HBCU, did not report experiencing any negative incidents or microaggressions due to his race or gender. Although he was an undocumented person, he did not report professors or students asking about or negatively reacting to his immigration status; however, he did lament not being able to speak to anyone in a similar situation regarding his struggles with his status. Diego, instead, reported feeling discouraged that there was so little Latinx representation in the history and present of engineering. This lack of representation impacted his self-efficacy, and while not a microaggression, spoke to the reoccurring theme of systemic discrimination that Latinx students faced. Regarding disparities, Juan stated: …[S]ometimes when I don’t do as well on tests, or don’t answer questions as quickly, … I feel like … why is this, or is it because of … the type of background that I have or, yeah, maybe, … they have some sort of advantage over me, I don’t know. … [M]aybe they’re just wealthier and have better resources, right. Miguel also noted that White peers were more likely to come from better high schools.
Gender
Regarding how systemic issues disadvantage girls and women, Rosa noted: I’m saying girls from a young age aren’t, you know, introduced to the STEM part of things in the same way that, you know, boys are … pretty early on. … I think boys are introduced to … more hands-on activities that I don’t think I was, or … girls are.”
Many of the other experiences the students reported suggest that the disparities between the Latinx students and their White peers, and the women and their male peers, are due to systemic discrimination in the United States.
Discussion
Research Question 1) What Microaggressions do Latinx Students Experience in an Engineering Education Environment?
The findings of this study demonstrate that Latinx students experienced microinvalidations (alien in own land), microinsults (ascription of intelligence, criminality, second class citizen, pathologizing communication styles, traditional gender role prejudice and stereotypes, and sexual objectification) as well as microassaults. Latinx students also experienced microaggressions based on their perceived ethnicity, country of origin (foreignness), race, gender, and the intersection of race and gender. The findings also support the past literature on Latinx students’ experiences with microaggressions (McCabe, 2009; Camacho & Lord, 2011; Minikel-Lacocque, 2013; Yosso et al., 2009). The students felt disconnected from their peers in an engineering education setting because they were Latinx and/or women in engineering. While students may have felt uncomfortable being the only ones in their courses, microaggressions only took place when those students were ignored, ostracized, or criticized because of their race and/or ethnicity or gender instead of their knowledge or skills. It is clear that peers were more likely to target Latinx students, yet professors were not immune to this discriminatory behavior.
CRT and LatCrit (Delgado et al., 2012; Pawley et al., 2018; Peralta et al., 2013; Pérez Huber, 2010; Yosso et al., 2009) explain that Latinx students are likely to feel disconnected from their White peers because racism has been normalized in the United States. Racism is further acceptable and likely to continue in the form of microaggressions because overt racism is frowned upon, leaving microaggressions a more acceptable form of discrimination (Sue et al., 2007). Normalized racism makes it easy to believe that students’ experiences were more likely due to their merit, or lack thereof, than actual prejudice targeting Latinx male and female students. The myth that success is merit driven in the United States allows for underrepresented students’ concerns to be ignored because this myth suggests that any failings are internal and not systemic (Garcia et al., 2018; Minikel-Lacocque, 2013; Pérez Huber, 2010; Yosso et al., 2009).
LatCrit (Pérez Huber, 2010) further explains Latinx students’ disconnection from White peers and being treated as worth less than their peers. Students’ perceived appearance as foreigners, especially when they were easily identifiable as Latinx, or regarding their English fluency, triggered microaggressions in the forms of racism and nativism. Peers’ derogatory jokes and insistence that English be spoken in public spaces made it clear that being foreign was unacceptable, or at the very least, less acceptable. Despite the diversity of Generation Z students (Giunta, 2017), these beliefs prevailed, which may have been encouraged by the political landscape at the time of the interviews.
Intersectionality
Much of the literature that discusses the experiences of Latinx students does so without elaborating on the impact gender has on those experiences (Pérez Huber, 2010). As previously explained, the intersectionality of identities, in this case race and gender, makes for a slight divergence in the microaggression incidents for male and female Latinx students in engineering. Women were likely to report not knowing if their experiences were due to being a woman, being Latinx, or both. Traditionally, it is believed that being female compounds the negative experiences of women of color (Crenshaw, 1989), but it is also clear in this study that Latinx male students were more likely to be the targets of hostile microaggressions, having to endure more face-to-face encounters with racism than their Latinx female peers by hearing insulting jokes, being called racial slurs and criminals/rapists. That intersectionally for Latinx males may have also resulted in their noticing and reacting to the harmful experiences of the women around them.
Some of the microaggression experiences of Latinx male students can be interpreted as due to their race and/or ethnicity and gender, while many of the Latinx female students in this study reported separate events, some targeting their race and/or ethnicity, while others targeted their gender. Although intersectionality manifested differently for women, it is important to note that Latinx women were likely to experience more microaggressions in an engineering education environment due to the quantity of microaggressions used to target women. Men frequently reported that they did not experience microaggressions solely due to their gender, but the quality of the microaggressions they experienced seemed to be due, in part, to their intersectional identities. Intersectionality is often discussed though the perspective of identities being combined with race and/or ethnicity, so it is important to note that the race component in intersectionally is more complex for Latinx students considering the somewhat ambiguous definitions of both terms (race and ethnicity) in the United States.
Race and Ethnicity
In addition to the differences between the experiences of men and women, there were also differences based on the perceived race and/or national origin of the Latinx students, which was more evident in the reports of males than females. Latinx is commonly referred to as an ethnicity in the United States because Latinx people can identify as Latinx, but also as White and non-White, acknowledging African, and/or Native (North and South) American ancestry. Latinx students may have an identity tied to their or their family’s national origins as well (Parker et al., 2015). The situation is further complicated by how Latinx people are perceived by others. Parker and colleagues report that 30% of Latinx individuals believe they are phenotypically perceived as White. White passing Latinx people are less likely to be discriminated against, or are differently discriminated against compared to their darker counterparts (Araujo-Dawson, 2015), which was supported in the current study. The Puerto Rican males whose skin was dark enough to be mistaken for Black were the subjects of racist jokes about Latinx people and Black people. The White Mexican male reported being treated as worth less after he told his peers he was Mexican, but he reported experiencing very few microaggressions. A small number of male students attending the PWI also reported few negative experiences due to their race, which may have been due to the students being perceived as White. These findings suggest that Latinx students can have very different experiences with discrimination, but not necessarily because discrimination is lessening for this group, but because some members of this group are less identifiable than others.
Institution Environment
Students’ reports also differed due to the student majority population attending the HBCU versus the PWI. While Latinx students were not the majority at either institution, the overall inclusive nature of the mission of many HBCUs suggest that Latinx students attending HBCUs are less likely to experience discrimination than their counterparts at PWIs (Williams, et al., 2019).While students attending both universities reported being targeted by microaggressions, the majority of the microaggressions took place at the PWI, with primarily gendered microaggressions taking place at the HBCU. None of the men attending the HBCU felt as if they had experienced discrimination or microaggressions. A Mexican American student did not consider the instances in which he was asked why he attended the HBCU racial microaggressions; his description of these incidents suggest that he felt the question was asked out of genuine curiosity.
Latinx women did report experiencing gendered microaggressions at the HBCU. This finding was also intuitive in that the engineering programs at the HBCU, like their PWI counterparts across the nation, were also male dominated. These women reported less gendered microaggressions than at the PWI, but the misconception that males are better at engineering persisted at the HBCU. However, it is important to note there were experiences of nativism related to speaking English and immigrant status at the HBCU. This is likely an example of intersectionality, as well. The Latinx male undocumented immigrant attending the HBCU reported that he did not experience any discrimination due to his undocumented status, while the female student, who was not an undocumented immigrant was asked about her immigration status. These students’ experiences with nativism, or lack thereof, suggest further research is needed to understand Latinx students’ experiences in an HBCU climate. What also emerged at the institutional level were the differences in faculty’s use of microaggressions. According to students’ accounts, faculty and staff were more likely to perpetuate microaggressions at the PWI than at the HBCU; however, students were able to find allies in faculty at both universities.
Research Question 2) How do these Microaggressions Impact Latinx Engineering Undergraduates’ Academic Well-being, as Defined by Their Academic Self-efficacy and Academic Performance?
The results established that Latinx students were able to reach out to family, peers, and organizations to share their challenges, which demonstrated that many of the Latinx students did not suffer in silence. On both campuses, students sought out help when they needed it. Seeking help and, in some cases, speaking directly with peers when they felt they had been slighted showed the students’ resilience. Though students did exhibit this healthy behavior, many of the students reported ignoring the microaggressions they experienced, which can be deleterious to mental health (Sanchez et al., 2018). Students also confessed feeling unsure about continuing in their majors, yet being determined to do so. Students’ strategies for resilience provide a blueprint to faculty and administration regarding ways in which to increase the retention of Latinx students in their program. Creating an environment in which it is clear that all students are valued by giving students a voice and providing spaces for students to find allies in faculty and peers (which includes increasing the number of underrepresented faculty; McGee, 2016) are all ways to increase student resiliency and begin to dismantle systemic disparities at the departmental level, as demonstrated by the Latinx students in the current study.
Limitations and Future Research
The findings of this study are compelling, but are limited in their scope. The number of participants recruited for the current study was appropriate for a qualitative study (Creswell & Poth, 2018), but there were much fewer women than men and much fewer students attending the HBCU than the PWI. These numbers reflect the larger population of males and students attending the PWI and HBCU; however, the lack of female students and students attending the HBCU may suggest differences in their experiences that are an artifact of this study rather than a reflection of Latinx students’ lived experiences. In addition to the differences in gender and institution participation, the race and gender of the interviewer may have also impacted the participants’ responses. Efforts were taken to match the race and/or gender of the interviewees; however, the interviewers at the HBCU were Black women and the interviewers at the PWI were a Latinx male, a Black male, and a White woman, meaning that at times there was incongruity between the participants and the interviewers’ race and gender identities. The interview protocol was designed to assist in creating a rapport between the interviewers and the participants, but participants may have still been hesitant to answer honestly regarding the sensitive subject of racial and gendered experiences in engineering education spaces. Future research must match the identities of the interviewers and the participants to avoid such challenges.
In addition to the previously mentioned limitations, there were also disparities in representation across race and national origin. The same can be said of the representation of engineering programs. Future research must address these issues. Future research must strive to recruit an equal number of males and females as well as equal representation at institutions, also including Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs). HSIs are institutions that receive government funding to support the recruitment and retention of Latinx students. HSI student populations are at least 25% Latinx and any institution that reaches that population percentage can be classified as an HSI (Hegji, 2017). HSI status differs from HBCU status in that HBCUs were created to serve the African American community, while any university can become and HSI. Including these institutions would provide insight into the experiences of Latinx students attending institutions where they are larger percentages of Latinx people in the areas surrounding the university, and where Latinx students are specifically targeted for success, especially considering, as found in the current study, the high number of microaggressions instigated by peers. This work will likely make clear what programs work to foster inclusion among students and therefore reduce the use of microaggressions.
Future research should include purposeful sampling to include Latinx people who identify as of White, African, or Native American descent. These students are likely to have different experiences due to how they are perceived by others, how they perceive themselves, and this research is likely to demonstrate whether or not racial identity salience differs across Latinx people of different races in the United States (Shih et al., 1999). There are likely differences in how students are treated across engineering programs as well, but more so due to gender than to race; however, identity intersectionality is likely to influence how students are targeted by microaggressions across engineering programs. Understanding these differences can lead to tailored interventions that will strengthen faculty and administrations’ ability to decrease the use of microaggressions and increase the recruitment and retention of Latinx students in engineering education.
Conclusion
Understanding the different experiences of students of color targeted by microaggressions in engineering education environments can lead to tailored interventions that will strengthen the faculty and administration’s ability to decrease the use of microaggressions and increase the recruitment and retention of Latinx students in engineering education. This study makes it clear that interventions designed to retain students of color cannot be “one-size-fits-all” programs. Traditionally, faculty has been trained to recognize and avoid succumbing to their implicit biases, but that training has not seemed to penetrate the institutional environment of a traditionally White male dominant and highly competitive field. More must be done to address student behavior, as well as the various nuances of Latinx students’ experiences. These interventions also cannot be a one-shot attempt. The participants of the current study noted their belief that some of their experiences were due to the actions of the Trump Administration, suggesting that societal and cultural changes, such as the election of a president, can lead to individual behavioral changes. Addressing these negative experiences must be an ongoing endeavor because, while CRT suggests an ever present undercurrent of prejudice and discrimination in the United States, the manifestation of that prejudice and discrimination has changed and will continue to change over time.
Interview Protocol
Section I: Tape Recorder Instructions
If it is okay with you, I will be recording our conversation. This is to ensure I document all of the details of this interview. I assure you all of your comments will remain confidential. I will be compiling a report that will contain all participants’ comments, but have no reference to individuals. Do you have any questions before we begin?
Section II
Introduction: I am going to ask you a few questions about your decisions to become an engineering student at [University Name]. 1. When did you decide to attend [University Name]? 2. Why did you decide to attend [University Name]? 3. What year did you declare your major? 4. What made you want to major in engineering? 5. What is your major?
Section II: Your Experiences
Now I’m going to ask you some questions about your experiences as an engineering student. 1. Can you recall an instance in class or outside (but related to school) when your gender was generally discussed? a. If so, will you tell me what happened? b. Did this happen with peers, faculty, or both? 2. Can you recall an instance in class or outside (but related to school) when your race or ethnicity was generally addressed? a. If so, will you tell me what happened? b. Did this happen with peers, faculty, or both? 3. [If participants have not already addressed this] Can you recall an instance inside or outside of class when both your gender and race/ethnicity were generally discussed? a. If so, will you tell me what happened? b. Did this happen with peers, faculty, or both? 4. Can you recall an instance inside or outside of class when you suspected you were treated negatively because of your gender, but you were not sure? a. If so, will you tell me what happened? b. Did this happen with peers, faculty, or both? 5. Can you recall an instance inside or outside of class when you suspected you were treated negatively because of your race/ethnicity, but you were not sure? a. If so, will you tell me what happened? b. Did this happen with peers, faculty, or both? 6. [If participants have not already addressed this] Can you recall an instance inside or outside of class when you suspected you were treated negatively because of your gender and race/ethnicity, but you were not sure? a. If so, will you tell me what happened? b. Did this happen with peers, faculty, or both? 7. Have you had experiences when you were insulted or the target of a slur due to your gender in school? a. If so, will you tell me what happened? b. Did this happen with peers, faculty, or both? 8. Have you had experiences when you were insulted or the target of a slur due to your race/ethnicity in school? a. If so, will you tell me what happened? b. Did this happen with peers, faculty, or both? 9. [If participants have not already addressed this] Have you had experiences when you were insulted or the target of a slur due to both your gender and race/ethnicity in school? a. If so, will you tell me what happened? b. Did this happen with peers, faculty, or both? 10. Have you had experiences that made you feel like you were not as worthwhile as your peers in school? a. [If yes] Do you believe these experiences were due to your gender? i. If so, will you explain those experiences to me? b. [If yes] Do you believe these experiences were due to your race? i. If so, will you explain those experiences to me? c. [If yes] Do you believe any of these experiences were due to both your race and gender? i. If so, how so? 11. Have you had experiences when you thought you were overlooked as a woman/man in school? a. If so, will you tell me what happened? b. Did this happen with peers, faculty, or both? 12. Have you had experiences when you thought you were overlooked as a person of color/White person in school? a. If so, will you tell me what happened? b. Did this happen with peers, faculty, or both? 13. Do you believe it is difficult to discuss gender in college? a. If yes, how so? b. If no, why not? 14. Do you believe it is difficult to discuss race in college? a. If yes, how so? b. If no, why not?
Section III: Impact of Positive and Negative Experiences
My last questions are about how the previous experiences made you feel. Don’t worry, we’re almost done! 1. [If participant reported negative experiences] Do you believe the negative experiences you mentioned above have affected your academic self-efficacy (you belief that you can do well academically)? If so, how so? 2. [If participant reported negative experiences] Do you believe the negative experiences you mentioned above have affected your academic performance? If so, how so? 3. [If participant reported negative experiences] Do you believe the negative experiences you mentioned above have affected your self-esteem? If so, how so? 4. [If participant reported negative experiences] Have you developed coping mechanisms against the negative experiences you mentioned above? If so, what are they? 5. Do you believe you will experience any of negative experiences regarding gender and/or race you mentioned above when you are an engineer? 6. Do you believe it will be difficult to discuss gender issues when you are an engineer? If so, why? If not, why not? 7. Do you believe it will be difficult to discuss racial/ethnic issues when you are an engineer? If so, why? If not, why not? 8. Have any of the negative experiences you’ve mentioned made you doubt becoming an engineer? Why or why not?
Section IV: Manipulation Check
One Last Question
1. [If participant reported negative experiences] Would you characterize any of your negative experiences as microagressions? [Microaggressions are instances when someone makes comments or slights against you due to your social categorization (gender and/or race, for instance) that are vague. Such comments may question why you are in a certain space, or invalidate your culture and make you feel like you’d be making a big deal out of nothing if you responded. Such as, “How did you get this job,” “You speak so eloquently,” or “I’m colorblind, I don’t see color.”]
This concludes the interview. Thank you for participating, we have greatly appreciated your input.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research is supported by National Science Foundation (#1828559).
