Why So Few: The Seen and Unseen Afterlives of Black Women and Girls in STEM

• In Event: Moscone Center North Roundtable Session 10
  In Roundtable Session: Bearing Witness Through Personal Experiences: Toward an Ontology and Epistemology of Experiential Curriculum as Resistance

Abstract

Purposes
As a Black girl coming of age in Mississippi, I received my first introduction to science in my granny’s kitchen. In the midst of her turning something into nothing—alchemy (Peñate, 2019)—I was amazed at her mastery of practical science, mathematics, and engineering. She was the first scientist I knew. However, upon enrollment in school (PK-20), I explored and learned other forms of science that did not honor Black women, girls, and their contributions. Instead, Black women and girls were like unicorns and those who achieved excellence e.g. Mae Jemison, were lauded. The narrative regarding the lack of Black women and girls along with their supposed disinterest in science (Ireland et.al., 2018) was pushed along with a need to increase the numbers of diverse people in the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM). “Why so few”, the question core to many conversations regarding the lack of Black bodies in STEM, is without critical reflection regarding what participation looks like and how it varies across raced and gendered dimensions (Hill et. al, 2010). The purpose of this paper is to advance how counter-narratives and experiences with STEM work to deconstruct science curriculum, while also informing the who, what, why, and how of science. To that end, I take to task the question: Why so Few, as a means of historicizing the inhumane ways Black bodies are exploited in science and what is needed to reconceptualize a science curriculum where Black women and girls do not function as subject, but as creators and innovators of science content.

Perspectives
While Henrietta Lacks died a physical death in 1951, the ways in which she is made part of the science cannon and curriculum is still living and becoming. Formal STEM access and participation has been limited for minoritized people, due to socio-historical/socio-political factors and continued issues of power/authority related to the masculine Eurocentric culture and discourse of the field (Walls 2016; Mensah and Jackson, 2018). This is reflected in STEM as a practice (e.g. Medicine, Research) and in science learning (formally/informally). Employing Critical Race Feminism (Wing, 1997) and key tenants of Counter-Storytelling and Intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1991; Charleston et.al. 2010), this work reimagines science curriculum (Berry, 2014) as a space authored by Black people—specifically Black women—for Black people (Laymon, 2018).

Discussion
I explore the ways in which the historical narrative of Henrietta Lacks, the living narratives of Black women pursuing PhDs in science, and the futuristic narratives of Black girls in a community-based STEM-rich makerspace disrupt what we know as participation in STEM while prompting reimaginings of STEM curriculum. Acknowledging the horrific experiences of Black women and girls for the advancement of science is necessary, but not commonly discussed. If science truly desires to be a field that is inclusive and just, it is necessary to be cognizant of the moments and experiences that propel the field, especially those that were dehumanizing (and continue to be) in order to prevent the reification of such practices.

Author

• ReAnna S. Roby, Vanderbilt University