See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/367442840

Unpacking and Critically Synthesizing the Literature on Race and Ethnicity in

Science Education

Chapter · January 2023

DOI: 10.4324/9780367855758-11

CITATIONS READS
4 615

2 authors:

Felicia Moore Mensah Julie A. Bianchini

Columbia University University of California, Santa Barbara
84 PUBLICATIONS 2,601 CITATIONS 73 PUBLICATIONS 1,458 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Felicia Moore Mensah on 17 February 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Lederman, N.G., Zeidler, D.L., & Lederman, J.S. (Eds.). (2023). Handbook of
Research on Science Education: Volume III (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi-
org.ezproxy.cul.columbia.edu/10.4324/9780367855758

8
UNPACKING AND CRITICALLY
SYNTHESIZING THE LITERATURE
ON RACE AND ETHNICITY IN
SCIENCE EDUCATION
How Far Have We Come?
Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

Historically and contemporarily, in the previous version of this chapter, Parsons (2014) gave an
informed account of the evolution of race and ethnicity in the United States, from the Naturalization
Act of 1790 to the shift in the language of using “ethnic-signifying labels” for self-identifcation and
identifcation from others (p. 169). “Race is understood as real not because it is an essential category
but as a historically specifc means of efecting certain forms of social organization, of mediating
human relations” (Warmington, 2009, p. 289); it is indeed real and demands our attention for dis-
cussion and research. Race and ethnicity are related, yet theoretically they are distinct. For example,
in his summary of race, ethnicity, and culture, Fenton (2010) distinguished the construct of race as
founded on markers of diference based upon visible, physical characteristics; ethnicity as based upon
cultural markers that serve as the reference point for diference; and culture as broadly defned to
encompass diverse elements, such as customs, language, religion, and traditions as well as distinctions
based upon self-identifcation and self-afliation (Nagel, 1994) or group identity and historical expe-
riences (Omi & Winant, 1994). Thus, race tends to reference biological or physiological diferences,
whereas ethnicity tends to reference cultural diferences. However, to bring a bit more context and
reason for the complexity in distinguishing race and ethnicity, Kivisto and Croll (2012) proposed
three responses for explaining race and ethnicity:

The frst suggests that racial groups and ethnic groups are two diferent types of groups. The
second position claims that while racial and ethnic groups are usually distinct, in some cir-
cumstances they are overlapping. The third views racial groups as a subset of ethnic groups.
(p. 4)

Even with research acknowledging that race is not a biological phenomenon (Smedley & Smedley,
2005), the hierarchical nature of diference is maintained (Omi & Winant, 1994) because race more
than ethnicity is defned in terms of power relations, group hierarchies, assessments of superiority and
inferiority, and a “natural category” or “permanent” designation, with ethnicity subject to historical
modifcation (Cornell & Hartman, 2007, pp. 26–32). Arguments against race as a social construction

DOI: 10.4324/9780367855758-11 221

 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

over the genetic or biological basis of race have been accepted by many theorists who are ready to
move onward in the conceptualization of a white racial framing (Feagin, 2020) and the “new racism”
explained by colorblindness and race neutrality, which do much harm when these are seen as goals
and ends of a post-racial world (Bonilla-Silva, 2017). These notions do not represent racial progress
but racial concealment in that a “structural-foundation metaphor” captures well the realities of the
United States’ racism, past and present (Feagin, 2020, p. 3).
On a global scale, and historically, the use of racial and ethnic terms is based on categoriza-
tion and hierarchy, including a rationalization for European colonization, slavery, and subjugation
of Indigenous Peoples by settlers from Australia, Canada, and the United States (Kivisto & Croll,
2012). Countries make distinctions across race and/or across ethnicity. For example, in Belgium, the
Flemish and Wallon ethnic communities are divided along ethnicity rather than race; similarly, in
Canada, for British Canadians and French Canadians; and in contrast, in South Africa, four groups
comprise their racial system. In these examples and many others, the use of terms and the language
of race and ethnicity are contextualized; thus, attention to how people are named and how they
name themselves, whether along racial or ethnic lines, requires awareness and understanding of the
historical context, place, and how categorizations change. As additional examples, one can look at
the US census categories over time, from 1790 to 2020, or the Ofce for National Statistics in the
United Kingdom. How people are categorized and what constitutes a racial or ethnic category will
continue to shift and change, which helps us to realize that these categories are socially constructed.
In her review of unpacking and critically synthesizing the literature on race and ethnicity in sci-
ence education published in an earlier handbook, Parsons (2014) noted the limited scope and depth
of the body of work in science education on race and ethnicity from a critical perspective and pro-
posed recommendations for future research and scholarship for science education. Parsons borrowed
from anthropology, history, and sociology to defne race and ethnicity as “context-based sociohistori-
cal constructs that exist across space and time” (Parsons & Bayne, 2012, as cited in Parsons, 2014,
p. 167), that are situated in the United States and that have evolved over time. She gave secondary
attention to the methods and fndings of the studies identifed. We have taken up these areas as well
as highlighted studies across global contexts in this current review.
Parsons (2014) ofered four critiques, or limitations, of race and ethnicity in the science education
literature: presentism, lack of conceptual clarity, individualism, and methodological myopia. First,
presentism is “a view that exclusively situates and circumscribes current conditions to the here and
now” (p. 168). Second, a lack of conceptual clarity is “the neglect of the purposeful construction of
race and ethnicity over time in the United States, the connection between their historical meanings
and contemporary adaptations, and the resemblances of past and present outcomes” (p. 168). Third,
the research on race and ethnicity did not explicitly defne these constructs, or proxies were used,
and frameworks considered the individual while ignoring the structural and systemic views of race
and ethnicity. Finally, the fourth is methodological myopia, which is a focus on a narrow selection
of research methods that “severely limited the potential” impact to address equality and equity in
science education (p. 168).
Finally, Parsons (2014) provided several recommendations and suggestions for research and schol-
arship on race and ethnicity for the feld of science education to address. These suggestions include
using tenets of critical race theory as underpinnings to lessen presentism and provide conceptual
clarity to balance race and ethnicity at the individual, group, structural, and systemic levels. In terms
of methodological myopia, she recommended taking on a “transformative paradigm” (p. 168) as an
alternative to either quantitative or qualitative methods and post-positivistic and constructivist para-
digms that reduce and restrict science education research to inform practice and policy.
The purpose in conducting this current review is to determine our progress in identifying the
ways the structured and systemic construction of race and ethnicity – or the individual, group-
level, and systemic construction of race and ethnicity (taken from Parsons, 2014) – have shaped

222
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

the teaching and learning of science and how this has been taken up in science education research.
Like Parsons (2014), we unpack and synthesize the recent literature and ofer recommendations to
transform methodological and conceptual work in science education research, policy, and practice.
We also examine how and in what ways the feld has realized the recommendations proposed by Par-
sons in the years since her review, in particular, using critical theories alone or in conjunction with
other theories in race- and ethnicity-focused research; abandoning the paradigm wars of research
approaches to focus on breadth and depth of research; and not only generating knowledge but also
transforming science education to become more equitable and socially just.

Method
We conducted a systematic review of the literature on race and ethnicity in science education pub-
lished during the last decade – from 2010 to 2020. (A few of the articles included here have 2021 or
2022 publication dates but were initially published online in 2019 or 2020.) Although the previous
handbook was published in 2014, we decided to begin our review in 2010 for two reasons. First,
the previous version of this chapter did not review articles, particularly articles outside the United
States, in a systematic way; the review missed some articles that we found to be relevant to this cur-
rent review. Second, because the previous version of this chapter found the literature on race and
ethnicity to be limited in scope and depth from a critical perspective, we wished to provide readers
a sense of how the literature has changed over the most recent decade, including part of the time
from the previous chapter. We focused our review on relevant science education articles published
in the following ten well-respected, peer-reviewed journals: the American Educational Research Journal,
Cultural Studies of Science Education, Educational Researcher, the International Journal of Science Education,
the Journal of Science Teacher Education, the Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Research in Science
Education, School Science and Mathematics, Science Education, and Teachers College Record. We used the
advanced search tool for each journal and entered the following search terms: science, race, and eth-
nicity. Our searches resulted in a total of 833 possible science education articles, which we uploaded
into Zotero, a reference management software program.
We narrowed this initial pool of articles through two rounds of review. For each round, we used
the following additional criteria: Studies needed to be empirical; to focus on some aspect of K–12
education (e.g., K–12 students, informal K–12 science education, preservice or practicing K–12
teachers, and/or K–12 science teacher educators); and to explicitly attend to race and ethnicity in
the study’s problem statement, literature review, and/or conceptual framework, not simply in the
description of the research context or as a factor in the analysis (for more on this last criterion, see
Parsons, 2014, p. 173). In our frst round, we read the abstract of each article to determine its ft
with our second set of criteria. In doing so, we reduced our initial pool to 231 articles. In our sec-
ond round of review, we conducted a more thorough examination of each article, again using the
aforementioned criteria in reading not only each article’s abstract but the theoretical framework and/
or literature review, methods, and discussion sections as well. After this second round of review, we
determined 169 articles met both sets of criteria – 143 from the United States and 26 from other
countries, including Brazil, China, Israel, Nigeria, South Africa, and the United Kingdom.
To facilitate the presentation of our fndings, we organized these resulting 169 articles into eight
categories: Three are structured by theory (Categories A, B, and C) and fve, by empirical topic
(Categories D, E, F, G, and H). We acknowledge from the outset that several articles could have been
placed in more than one of our eight categories and that several do not neatly ft into any category.
We then used Parsons’s (2014) three recommendations for future research on race and ethnicity in
science education to unpack and synthesize the articles in each category. As previously stated, Par-
sons recommended (1) that critical theories be used alone or with other theories to frame studies of
race and ethnicity, (2) that mixed methods be used more regularly to investigate the complex nature

223
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

Table 8.1 Summary of Science Education Research on Race and Ethnicity

Category Total Number of Number of Studies With

Studies Mixed Methods

Category A: Critical Race Theory 11 1

Category B: Critical Race Theory and 11 0
Intersectionality
Category C: Sociocultural Perspectives on 43 8
Theory and Identity
Category D: Science Curriculum and 53 11
Pedagogy
Category E: Language in Intersection 16 4
with Race and Ethnicity
Category F: Aspiration and Motivation to 16 1
Learn and Teach Science
Category G: Teacher Perceptions and 14 0
Experiences
Category H: Assessments 5 0

of race and ethnicity constructs, and (3) that studies seek to transform science education to become
more equitable and socially just. For example, within a given category, we identifed studies as quali-
tative, quantitative, or mixed method (Creswell & Creswell, 2017).
Table 8.1 lists our eight categories, the number of articles included in each, and the number of
articles that employed mixed methods (see again the second recommendation from Parsons, 2014).
The number of studies that employed mixed methods was strikingly small, comprising only 15%
(n=25) of the 169 studies we reviewed here. Indeed, only three of our eight categories had more
than one study that included mixed methods. In contrast, approximately 60% of the studies reviewed
(n=101) used qualitative methods, and a quarter (n=43) used quantitative methods.

Critical Race Theory: The Structured and Systemic

Construction of Race and Ethnicity
We begin our review of K–12 science education literature by focusing on research that employed
a critical race theory lens. As stated earlier, this was the frst of Parsons’s (2014) three recommenda-
tions for future research on race and ethnicity. From our pool of 169 articles, we identifed a total
of 22 articles that drew from constructs tied to critical race theory to shape their investigation. We
divided these articles into two categories: (1) those that employed critical race theory and (2) those
that used intersectionality, a construct that connects to critical race theory, Black feminist thought,
and critical race feminism (Collins, 2016; Crenshaw, 2016; Wing, 1997). We elaborate on each of
these two categories next.

Category A: Critical Race Theory

We identifed 11 articles – all situated in the United States – that were categorized as critical race
theory. Critical race theory arose from critical legal studies (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017) and has been
applied across various felds, including education (Dixson et al., 2016). Nine of these articles were
qualitative studies (Kang & Zinger, 2019; Nazar et al., 2019; Ridgeway & Yerrick, 2018; Settlage,

224
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

2011; Sparks & Pole, 2019; Visintainer, 2020; Wallace & Brand, 2012; Yerrick & Johnson, 2011;
Zirkel & Pollack, 2016), one was mixed methods (Mutegi et al., 2019), and one was quantitative
(Walls, 2016). Six of these studies used critical race theory within the context of K–12 schools with
African American students in high school science classes (Visintainer, 2020; Yerrick & Johnson,
2011), with two middle school science teachers who taught their African American students using
culturally responsive teaching (Wallace & Brand, 2012), and with three out-of-school programs
that engaged African American students and their teachers (Mutegi et al., 2019; Nazar et al., 2019;
Ridgeway & Yerrick, 2018). Three studies grouped in this category used critical race theory in
teacher education contexts: one is an education course with education majors (Settlage, 2011), one
is a master’s-level course on diversity for teachers (Sparks & Pole, 2019), and one is a series of science
methods courses for novice teachers (Kang & Zinger, 2019). The remaining two studies used critical
race theory to analyze school district data (Zirkel & Pollack, 2016) or empirical studies on nature of
science (NOS; Walls, 2016).

Counternarratives
In 8 of the 11 studies in this category, scholars gave attention to one of critical race theory’s domi-
nant tenets – counternarratives or counterstorytelling or counterstories. Counterstorytelling, defned
by Solórzano and Yosso (2002b), is a method of telling the stories of people whose experiences
are on the margins of society and is used as “a tool for exposing, analyzing, and challenging the
majoritarian stories of racial privilege” (p. 32). They are shared to dispel the dominant narratives that
pervade society and education. Thus, as a tool, counterstorytelling draws explicitly on experiential
knowledge and the unique voice of people of color (Matsuda et al., 1993). While counternarratives
are used to question what is accepted through stories and narratives from people of color (Zamudio
et al., 2010), they may be used as a methodological approach in the collection and analysis of coun-
terstories (Parker & Lynn, 2002; Solórzano & Yosso, 2002b).
Settlage (2011) used counternarratives to extinguish defcit thinking about white education
majors. In collaboration with his preservice teachers, he revealed a more complex and less “cari-
catured representation” of the shifting identities of mainstream future teachers who did not ft the
“damaged goods” image of working with students from diverse cultural backgrounds. Visintainer
(2020) also collected counternarratives with her study participants to examine youths’ accounts of
their racialized science experiences. She investigated how these high school students of color made
sense of racialized narratives about who can and does science.
In their longitudinal research study, Nazar et al. (2019) used the construct of critical epistemologies
of place to engage with one 12-year-old African American boy in engineering design with experts
and knowledgeable others in his community space. These researchers used counternarratives more in
the sense of challenging dominant narratives of place, where “epistemologies of place as ‘embodied
knowledge’ arising from one’s relationship with their environment, always oriented towards their
future and that of their survival” (p. 642). Nazar and colleagues suggested that engaging in engineering
design through a critical epistemology of place involves an iterative and generative process of layering
community wisdom and knowledge onto STEM toward (1) acknowledging how epistemologies of
place – and their layers – challenge dominant master narratives and (2) reimagining practices in place as
well as (3) transforming the dangerous territory of STEM. In brief, these researchers expanded upon
current understandings of supporting youth in engaging in engineering through highlighting the vital
role of sociohistorically constructed understandings of STEM and community in determining when,
how, and why engineering takes place. These latter two studies used counternarratives as a primary
method of gathering stories from participants and themselves, like Settlage (2011).
Walls (2016) used critical race theory to examine 112 peer-reviewed studies, from 1967 to
2013, that investigated NOS. This was the only quantitative study in this category that used

225
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

critical race theory. Walls reported that Black, Latino/a, Native American, and other people of
color were found to be disproportionally excluded as participants in NOS research, thus bring-
ing to attention the silencing of these individuals and making suggestions for NOS research to
make it more equitable. In his fndings, Walls identifed four types of inequity based on race
operating within NOS research analyzed. In addition to missing or muted counternarratives,
he highlighted the existence of a colorblind ideology, white privilege, and structural racism in
NOS research.
Furthermore, within this subcategory of studies, critical race theory was used in conjunction with
other theoretical perspectives. As one example, Sparks and Pole (2019) used critical race theory with
social cognitive career theory in their study of 14 science and mathematics teachers. The participants
engaged in a series of virtual chats using open-ended questioning that was also facilitated by two
university instructors. The topics of ethnic and racial diversity, gender, and stereotypes were discussed
with the participants and their students. Sparks and Pole presented three primary themes: under-
standing of issues related to stereotypes, encouragement of females and minorities to pursue careers
in STEM, and the place for diversity discussions in science and mathematics classrooms. The teachers
felt burdened by administrative and curricular constraints that inhibited their ability to participate in
thought-provoking critical conversations.
As a second example of using critical race theory with other theoretical constructs, in this case,
LatCrit theory and the social construction of merit and worth, Zirkel and Pollack (2016) presented a
case analysis of the controversy and public debate generated from a school district’s eforts to address
racial inequities in educational outcomes. The narratives presented to the school district and com-
municated from the debate and in documents revealed how students were viewed and how funding
was allocated. They showed that diverting special funds from the highest-performing students seek-
ing elite college admission to the lowest-performing students who were struggling to graduate from
high school was met with great opposition. Zirkel and Pollack identifed a narrative cycle of debate:
(1) colorblind rhetoric, (2) academic performance is presumed to emerge solely from talent and efort
so that (3) academic performance then becomes a measure of worth, and fnally, (4) eforts to address
racial disparities are “unfair”. The narratives presented in documents and debated among stakehold-
ers identifed some students as worthy and others as unworthy, which greatly infuenced funding,
educational outcomes, and policies.

Microaggressions
One study used critical race theory, but through the process of analysis, ofered extended constructs
related to it (Mutegi et al., 2019). In the only mixed-methods study in this category, Mutegi et al.
(2019) addressed African American students’ experiences in science with microaggressions, which are
subtle, everyday forms of racism (Solórzano & Huber, 2020). Racial microaggressions are brief and
commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unin-
tentional. They communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults toward people
of color (Sue et al., 2007).
Mutegi et al. (2019) investigated both secondary students and teachers who participated in a
two-week nanotechnology camp. From the pre- and post-survey data, the camp was found to suc-
cessfully foster increased interest in STEM; however, the ethnographic data revealed diferences in
how the participants experienced the camp. More specifcally, the qualitative data revealed that Afri-
can American students had radically diferent experiences than their non–African American peers
and identifed specifc incidents of microaggressions. The microaggressions were pervasive – they
came from students, instructors, and the environment – and in response, African American students
adopted detachment-coping strategies. All of these factors collectively worked against the African
American students’ success, camp experience, and learning.

226
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

Category B: Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality

Intersectionality is also a tenet of critical race theory (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). The concept
of intersectionality refers to particular suppressive forms that are manifested by the overlapping or
intersection of multiple oppressions. For example, race and gender are intersecting oppressions for
Black women in a society where full membership is based upon whiteness for feminist thought,
maleness for Black social and political thought, and a combination of both for maximum participa-
tion in mainstream society (Collins, 2016). Therefore, intersectionality is a way of understanding and
analyzing the complexity in the world, in people, and in human experience. Six core ideas provide
a guidepost for thinking through intersectionality as an analytic tool: (1) inequality, (2) relationality,
(3) power, (4) social context, (5) complexity, and (6) social justice. All of these ideas do not have
to be present in a particular study nor do they have to appear in studies in the same ways (Collins,
2016). For this reason, an analysis of studies of critical race theory and intersectionality for this cat-
egory is divided into subcategories related to some of these analytical tools and within diferent areas
of science education.
We identifed 11 articles that were categorized as intersectionality. Ten of these articles used dif-
ferent approaches to qualitative research. Four were long-term or longitudinal studies (Calabrese
Barton & Tan, 2018; Mark, 2018; Mensah, 2019; Pringle et al., 2012). Three others were conducted
in science methods courses (Mensah & Jackson, 2018; Rivera Maulucci, 2013; Sparks, 2018); one
was conducted in an advanced placement secondary biology class (Ryu, 2015); one, in a community-
based informal STEM program (King & Pringle, 2019); and one, in and outside science classrooms
(Teo, 2015). The one quantitative study in this category used a national cohort of eighth-grade
students to consider how diferent gender and racial/ethnic subgroups compared to white males in
their aspirations for careers in science or mathematics (Riegle-Crumb et al., 2011). Only one of
these studies (Teo, 2015) was situated in a country (Singapore) other than the United States. The ten
qualitative studies in this group are further divided into the two following subcategories.

Part 1: Intersectionality in Science Teacher Education

Four studies in science teacher education used critical race theory as both a theoretical and method-
ological lens (Mensah, 2019; Mensah & Jackson, 2018; Rivera Maulucci, 2013; Sparks, 2018). First,
Mensah’s (2019) longitudinal case study utilized critical race theory methodology to chronicle the
journey of an African American female in elementary science teacher education. The study looked
at her educational history frst as a young Black child and then how she navigated a contested, racial-
ized, predominantly white teacher education program; grew and developed in science education;
and secured her frst full-time teaching appointment as an elementary teacher. Mensah noted that
intersectionality foregrounds and adds to the complexity of understanding race, racism, and science
in teacher education in telling several critical race narratives of Michele, the teacher in the study.
Sparks (2018), in his science methods course, worked with a group of three African American
female preservice STEM teachers. These preservice teachers participated in semi-structured, face-
to-face interviews, where they shared their experiences in STEM, reasons for their choice of major,
obstacles and challenges, instances of racism or sexism, and identity development. The results showed
that the females were not discouraged by their underrepresentation; were confdent in their abilities;
and expressed wide variation in their identity development related to race, gender, and feld of study.
Like Mensah (2019) and Sparks (2019), Rivera Maulucci (2013) focused on the development of
teacher identity within a science methods course. As a case study of the historical development of an
African American, Caribbean preservice teacher’s social justice stance, Rivera Maulucci used emo-
tional genealogy, critical emotional praxis, and positional identity as frameworks. The narratives she
shared of Nicole focused on what emotions she expressed and how those emotions helped Nicole

227
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

position herself concerning social justice issues as she navigated becoming a social justice chemistry
teacher.
Finally, the setting for the last article in this subcategory was a graduate-level preservice elemen-
tary science methods course (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). The purpose of this study was to analyze
the experiences of preservice Teachers of Color (PTOC) enrolled in the science methods course and
how they gained access to science as white property. Mensah and Jackson used themes from critical
race theory (CRT), such as the unique voice of people of color, and positionalities to interpret the
data from a CRT perspective. Taken together, the four studies in this subcategory used several of the
analytical tools of intersectionality, such as a focus on inequality, power, and social justice, to trans-
form science teacher education to make it more equitable and socially just for teacher candidates.
Attention to the race and ethnicity of the participants also revealed how their identities assisted or
challenged their navigation in science teacher education.

Part 2: Intersectionality in School or Community-Based Settings

Six studies employed intersectionality to investigate science teaching and learning in school and/
or community-based settings. The study by Teo (2015) was the only one that focused on teachers;
the rest focused on students and are discussed further here. Calabrese Barton and Tan (2018), as
one example, conducted a multiyear study focused on 41 team projects involving 48 youth mak-
ers within the rich culture of their communities. The interviews with the youth teams covered
questions about understanding the artifact they created, engaging in the process of making, sharing
STEM knowledge and practices, and expressing their meaning and value of engaging in the proj-
ect. A central aspect of the youth’s participation in the community maker project was to “reclaim
their experiences, lives, and communities in more complex and agentic ways than what dominant
narratives imply” (p. 779). A major lesson from the study was supporting youth in co-making in
their community and situating knowledge production within their local contexts. By doing so,
for the youth and their projects, participation, learning, and sharing were pivotal in decolonizing
and disrupting normative power dynamics among the youth, adults, and context. The youth drew
from their local knowledge as “oppressed and empowered insiders and forced attention on typically
silenced narratives around low-income communities” (p. 798).
King and Pringle (2019) also utilized intersectionality, and specifcally critical race feminism,
in their work with K–12 Black girls to expose racial and gender essentialism as the girls navigated
between formal and informal STEM learning spaces. Critical race feminism, like intersectionality,
focuses on the lives of people who face multiple forms of discrimination based on race, gender,
and class, for example, and reveals how these factors interact with a system of white male patri-
archy and racist oppression (Wing, 1997). Like Calabrese Barton and Tan’s (2018) study of youth
community science learning, King and Pringle (2019) used counterspaces, or “sites where defcit
notions of people of color can be challenged and where a positive climate can be established and
maintained” (Solórzano et al., 2000, p. 70). The researchers provided shelter from the “daily tor-
rent of microaggressions” (Howard-Hamilton, 2003, p. 23) that people of color experience. This
community-based program operated in partnership with local organizations and businesses as well
as university students and faculty. The program exposed participants to colleges, careers, and other
informal science institutions. A total of 73 students participated, 39 of whom were girls and 34 of
whom were boys; all 73 participants identifed as Black or biracial, and approximately 74% of the
participants qualifed for free or reduced lunch. Using CRT methodology (Solórzano & Yosso,
2002a), the authors shared counterstories of the girls’ experiences in the I AM STEM program and
presented their multidimensional identities across contexts. Illuminating the voices of Black girls
informs research methods and ofers some best practices for more inclusive informal STEM learning
programs for children of color.

228
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

Though Pringle et al. (2012) did not use intersectionality as the theoretical framework for their
study, their work was rooted in the feminist ideology of positionality (Holland et al., 1998), which
provides a framework to examine the complex and relational roles of ethnicity, gender, socioeco-
nomics, and other identifers that can infuence their experiences. Pringle and colleagues argued that
the persistent underachievement of African American girls from low-income communities remains
a challenge and that this phenomenon has not been addressed thoroughly in the literature. In their
three-year longitudinal study, they examined how African American girls positioned themselves
concerning science and mathematics learning from ffth to seventh grade. Their reporting of fnd-
ings from this study looked at the positioning of teachers, counselors, and parents in this process, and
the science and mathematics teachers’ actions, perceptions, and positioning of the African American
girls. In their fndings, they indicated that the science and mathematics teachers lacked awareness of
their roles as advocates for Black girls and that they were also unaware of the deleterious efects of
low expectations, which could ultimately afect the girls’ positionalities as science and mathematics
learners as they transitioned into secondary school. Further, standardized tests utilized as a measure-
ment tool of accountability also afected teachers’ beliefs and behaviors in positioning the girls in
science and mathematics.
Similar to the work by Pringle et al. (2012), Ryu (2015) did not apply an intersectionality lens, yet
she examined six Korean transnational girls enrolled in two advanced placement (AP) biology classes
to understand their experiences in science classrooms at the intersection of race, language, and gender.
She confronted the model minority stereotype for Asian students, which is particularly salient in sci-
ence-, technology-, engineering-, and mathematics-related disciplines. The premise of the study was
to inquire why the six girls chose to take advanced science and mathematics courses. Ryu noted that
the girls’ decision to take such courses was their way of negotiating their positions as members of a
racial minority, as English learners, and as Koreans with stereotyped characteristics. Though they were
challenged due to modes of language, unfamiliarity with science terminology, complex texts, and
various knowledge beyond the texts, as well as social linguistic skills and discursive practices, they did
not feel empowered to pursue academic support in the gendered settings of their advanced courses.
Most of the studies we identifed on intersectionality focused on girls or women. However, Mark
(2018), in her long-term qualitative case study, focused on one African American male, Randy, who
expressed high-achieving STEM career goals in computer science and engineering. Randy devel-
oped a STEM identity during an informal STEM-for-social-justice community of practice program
where he also used an “economics” lens and integrated STEM, economics, and community engage-
ment. This study communicated the importance of recognizing and supporting the development
of holistic and nontraditional STEM identities, especially for diverse populations in STEM, such as
Black boys, and exploring long-term STEM career options.

Additional Constructs Used to Shape Investigations of Race and Ethnicity

We grouped the remaining 147 articles into six additional constructs or categories that facilitated our
unpacking and critically synthesizing the literature on race and ethnicity in science education. We begin
this section with our third conceptual category – sociocultural perspectives on theory and identity – and
then present the remaining topical categories by size – from the category with the largest number of
articles identifed to the smallest. Similar to the previous sections, we found common themes to divide
and discuss the articles by paying attention to the recommendations from Parsons (2014).

Category C: Sociocultural Perspectives on Theory and Identity

We categorized 43 articles as sociocultural perspectives on theory and identity. The articles we
reviewed in this category drew from sociocultural perspectives in their investigations of science

229
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

education tied to race and ethnicity. We divided the articles into two major parts: sociocultural
theoretical frameworks and sociocultural identity. The latter category was further divided into mixed
methods and quantitative designs, school contexts, and teacher education for ease of presenting the
studies.

Part 1: Sociocultural Theoretical Frameworks

There are 13 articles in this subcategory on sociocultural perspectives as they relate to theoretical frame-
works used by researchers to guide their work. All of these studies took a qualitative approach, although
they were situated in diferent contexts, such as science teacher education (Alexakos et al., 2016; McNew-
Birren et al., 2018); K–12 science classrooms with a focus on students (Carlone et al., 2015; Kang et al.,
2018; Parker, 2014; Varelas et al., 2015; Zhang & Barnett, 2015); K–12 science classrooms with a focus
on interactions between teachers and students (Pitts, 2011; Richardson Bruna, 2010); students’ lived
experiences across academic, professional, psychosocial, and emotional spaces (Gallard Martínez et al.,
2019); American [Native] Indian students’ performance on standardized tests (Dupuis & Abrams, 2017);
cross-cultural exploration of children’s everyday ideas across the United States, Singapore, and China
(Wee, 2012); and families’ experiences in science museums in London (Archer et al., 2016).
Within this collection of studies, researchers emphasized the importance of student voice or
research with participants from diverse positionalities and experiences in science, mathematics, and
teacher education. Findings from the studies revealed how the educational system was vulnerable to
society’s cultural values and norms and thus infuenced Latina students’ STEM trajectories and inter-
ests in science (Gallard Martínez et al., 2019; Parker, 2014), African American students’ behaviors
and attitudes in their science classes (Kang et al., 2018), and Native American students’ performance
on standardized tests (Dupuis & Abrams, 2017). What these studies have in common in their use
of sociocultural frameworks is the visible interplay of race, class, and gender primarily in students’
and teachers’ interactions within larger societal structures and the ways they interrogate and navigate
meanings of science. Individual case studies make evident these experiences and challenges for par-
ticipants (Pitts, 2011; Richardson Bruna, 2010; Varelas et al., 2015).
The theoretical perspectives used by the researchers juxtapose sociocultural perspectives that allow
race and ethnicity to be mediating factors in understanding science teaching, learning, and experi-
ences. We would not say these perspectives are inherent to the participants’ social identities or the
theoretical frameworks used, yet the positionalities of the participants make explicit reference to their
experiences due to racial and ethnic identity as well as gender and class. For example, two studies
specifcally, one that introduced a sociocultural analytical framework (Gallard Martínez et al., 2019)
and another that used multiple sociocultural lenses (Richardson Bruna, 2010), revealed the complex
interaction of race and ethnicity with class.
First, Gallard Martínez and colleagues (2019) introduced the concept of contextual mitigat-
ing factors (CMFs) as a theoretical construct and found it helpful in understanding how Latinas
who demonstrated success in the STEM pipeline navigated in shifting socio-historical-political
contexts. Using CMFs as both theoretical and methodological analyses, the authors discussed that
fuid social felds are essential to understanding the factors Latinas experience and create in their
social interactions. The development of CMFs is discussed within the constructs of social place
(Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992), social feld (Swartz, 1997), and dynamic space (Tobin, 2009).
The researchers presented two case studies focusing on Latinas’ successes in STEM felds using an
intrinsic case study method. They emphasized the benefts associated with CMF analysis, namely,
the provision of an additive framework in understanding the lived experiences of minoritized
groups. By attending to the role macro-, meso-, and microgenic CMFs play in ethnic minority
students’ educational experiences, educators at all levels may play a substantively larger role in
helping sustain their agency as learners.

230
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

Second, building upon previous work, Richardson Bruna (2010) continued her investigation of
the experiences of a Mexican immigrant transnational student, Augusto, and employed a class-frst
perspective to examine Augusto’s science education experience coming from a subsistence farm-
ing community in rural Mexico to an industrialized meatpacking community in semirural Iowa.
Augusto underwent a class transformation, or a change in his class identity, that was a product of his
science class. Augusto worked to resist the processes of disciplinary production as he reshaped his
teacher’s instruction through specifc transnational social capital using peer mediation. The atten-
tion to a sociohistorical, situated perspective to science teaching and learning contributed to how
not only race and ethnicity but also “class-cognizant” analysis in science education was informed by
Augusto’s transnational social capital.
Finally, there has been little research from both an international perspective and a critical foun-
dation of science learning perspective of children’s everyday ideas. Using social constructivism as a
theoretical framework, Wee (2012) conducted a study with 210 children, mainly Asians and Asian
Americans, from urban settings. The participants ranged in age from elementary to middle school.
This paper explored children’s everyday ideas and drawings about the environment across the United
States, Singapore, and China to understand what they reveal about children’s relationship to the
environment. The fndings implied the need for (1) a change in the role of science teachers from
knowledge providers to social developers, (2) a science curriculum that is specifc to learners’ experi-
ences in diferent sociocultural settings, and (3) a shift away from inter-country comparisons using
international science test scores. Though several categories supported existing literature on children’s
ideas about the environment, Wee acknowledged that there were novel categories that also emerged,
giving new insight into the role that language, sociocultural norms, and ethnicity play in shaping
children’s everyday ideas.

Part 2: Sociocultural Identity

For this second subcategory on sociocultural perspectives related to identity, we identifed 30 articles
and further divided them into three subcategories. In most of these studies, the researchers identifed
the race, ethnicity, and gender of the participants, and in a few cases, additional identity markers,
such as socioeconomic status or immigration status. However, these studies varied along several
other dimensions, including methods employed. Of these studies, one (Chapman & Feldman, 2017)
explicitly discussed their rationale for using the terms “race” and “ethnicity”.
To elaborate, Chapman and Feldman (2017) used the construct “race/ethnicity” to denote their
understanding of race as “the physical characteristics of an individual that arise genetically, while
ethnicity is the norms, customs, and rituals of a particular group in a specifc region” (p. 470). They
continued, “It is not always possible to diferentiate between the students’ perceptions concerning
race or ethnicity. For this reason, we use the phrase race/ethnicity throughout the study” (p. 470).
Later in the study, in their description of the Identify-A-Scientist instrument they used to examine
students’ perceptions of scientists, Chapman and Feldman explained why they asked students to state
the ethnicity, rather than the race, of the individuals they selected as most likely to be scientists:

However, our decision to use the term ethnicity rather than race was based in part on the
considerable diversity in the community in which the study took place. For example, some
participants and their families might identify as African American, Spanish speaking Afri-
can Caribbean, English speaking African Caribbean, Kreyol speaking African Caribbean,
or from any of many African countries. Those not identifying with one of these ethnici-
ties might see these individuals as belonging to a single racial group. Similar consideration
emerges from the use of Hispanic or Latino. Outsiders might see the Latino participants
as a single ethnic group, while the participants and their families might identify as being

231
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

from any of many Latin American countries, including Puerto Rico, Cuba, the Dominican
Republic, Honduras, and Mexico.
(p. 478)

Thus, this quote demonstrates explicit attention to naming, identifying, and not essentializing the
racial and ethnic identity of individuals and groups (Rivera Maulucci & Mensah, 2015). We note this
exception in that most of the studies in this review did not diferentiate and make this distinction for
the participants, or an individual, in their study.

Part 2a: Sociocultural Identity and Mixed-Methods or Quantitative Designs

Ten studies used either mixed-methods or quantitative approaches to investigating sociocultural
identity. Three mixed-methods studies were conducted in London (Archer et al., 2010, 2014, 2015),
four were situated in the United States (Chapman & Feldman, 2017; Habig et al., 2020; Hughes
et al., 2013, 2021), and one used data drawn from multiple countries (Ferguson & Lezotte, 2020).
Two studies also conducted in the United States employed quantitative approaches (Kang et al.,
2019; Vincent-Ruz & Schunn, 2021).
In one study, Habig et al. (2020) used triangulation methods in collecting and synthesizing quali-
tative and quantitative data to examine how participation in a longitudinal ISE out-of-school time
(OST) program facilitated by the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH) impacted the
STEM trajectories of 66 alumni. The majority of the participants were females and/or members
of historically underrepresented racial and ethnic groups. Of 62 respondents (data from four par-
ticipants were missing), 64.5% were females and 35.5% were male. Further, 32.3% self-identifed as
African American; 29.0% as Asian; 22.6% as Latino/a; 12.9% as white/Non-Hispanic; and 3.2% as
Other. A purposeful sample of 21 of these participating alumni was selected for interviews. Of the
21 participants in this purposeful sample, 71.4% were female and 28.6% were male. Further, 33.3%
self-identifed as African American; 23.8% as Asian; 19.0% as Latino/a; and 23.8% as white/Non-
Hispanic. The authors used a community of practice and social capital framework to discuss the
alumni’s STEM career trajectories or persistence in STEM.
Using latent class analysis, Vincent-Ruz and Schunn (2021) collected survey responses from over
1,200 urban public school students in the sixth, seventh, and ninth grades from two diferent regions
in the United States. The surveys asked about students’ topical identities, choice preferences, and
optional science experiences. Data were collected from students attending schools that varied widely
by race/ethnicity (i.e., underrepresented groups in science, 23–99%) and socioeconomic status (i.e.,
students from low-income families eligible for free/reduced lunch at school, 26–84%). In total, data
were collected from 20 sixth-grade, 45 seventh-grade, and 37 ninth-grade classes drawn from 23
public schools. Participants were from both genders, and the racial and ethnic groups consisted of
white, Black, Asian, and Latinx.
For three studies in this subgroup, the race and/or ethnicity in intersection with the gender of the
participants were acknowledged. First, Hughes et al. (2013) added to the policy debate about single-
sex schooling for girls in science, with data collected from African American, Asian American, and
white girls as well as African American and white boys. They used pre- and post-surveys (with Lik-
ert scale and open-ended questions), post-interviews with teachers, and select post-interviews with
students to derive their fndings. The researchers found that the single-sex learning environment was
not as important as the pedagogy used in the two programs for the experiences and science identity
development for girls in an all-girls STEM camp and a coeducational STEM camp.
Second, Hughes et al. (2021) looked further into the coding identity development of three girls
they studied as cases – one Latina, one African American, and one white. The study was driven by
understanding how the girls performed their coding identity work (competence performance and

232
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

identity performance), and how their work was recognized by peers and educators with the ultimate
purpose of creating a coding identity framework for future researchers. The authors wondered, how-
ever, what role gender and racial stereotypes have on leadership and competence, especially in how
Black girls and women are viewed. They suggested more research is needed in looking at gender and
race, and the impact of stereotypes on how girls shape their coding identities.
In the third study, Kang et al. (2019) looked at STEM identity development for girls of color.
They used social practice theory, identity, and sense of self as theoretical constructs. The research-
ers analyzed a large data set of survey responses (n=1,821) collected at fve middle schools in low-
income communities across four states in the United States. Analyses focused on key constructs
that inform girls’ development of sense of self; relations among those indicators of STEM identities
varied by their race/ethnicity. In the fnal version of the modifed Is Science Me? (ISME) survey,
the race/ethnicity item included six categories (e.g., African American/Black African; white/
Caucasian/European/European American) as well as an “Other” category. The survey prompted
students to “check all that apply”. A total of seven racial/ethnic groups emerged from students’
responses, including three groups with small sample sizes: white (n= 357), African American
(n= 306), Latinx (n= 378), Asian American (n= 322), Multiracial (n= 366), Hawaiian (n= 34),
American Indian (n= 9), and Other (n= 56). Due to their small numbers, the researchers dropped
adolescents who only identifed as Hawaiian, American Indian, and Other for their analysis using
structural equation modeling (SEM). The fnal fve race/ethnicity groupings allowed the research-
ers to conduct robust statistical analyses, in particular focusing on group diferences by gender and
by race/ethnicity.
For specifc examples of identity work and mixed-methods design, there was a series of three
studies conducted in the United Kingdom (UK) from a fve-year longitudinal survey that inves-
tigated minority ethnic students’ science and career aspirations (Archer et al., 2010, 2014, 2015).
The ASPIRES project was funded by the UK’s Economic and Social Research Council as part of
its Targeted Initiative on Science and Mathematics Education. This fve-year, longitudinal study was
conducted among 10–14-year-olds, and data were collected from a quantitative online survey of
more than 9,000 10–11-year-old pupils from a range of backgrounds, socioeconomic statuses, and
ethnic diversities, and qualitative interviews with a subset of students and parents. The studies have
some overlap with the next category, identity and school contexts; still, the children’s responses were
analyzed through the lens of identity as an embodied and performed construction.
Specifcally, Archer et al. (2015) utilized survey data from nationally representative student cohorts
and longitudinal interview data collected over four years. Ten Black African/Caribbean students,
who were tracked from ages 10 to 14 (Years 6–9), and their parents were participants in this study.
The researchers used an intersectional analysis of the qualitative data to examine why science careers
are less “thinkable” for Black students. They also conducted a case study of two young Black women
who “bucked the trend” and aspired to science careers. Their theoretical approach draws on several
constructs: frst, feminist, postcolonial, and “intersectional” poststructuralist theorizations of identity
as a tool for understanding students’ identifcation with science and, second, a Bourdieusian-inspired
conceptualization of “science capital”.
Finally, Ferguson and Lezotte’s (2020) systematic review and meta-analysis of articles that used the
1995 Draw-A-Scientist Checklist (DAST-C) ofered recommendations for revisions to the DAST-C
that could assist in capturing more modern scientist stereotypes and culturally bound perceptions
of scientists. The researchers recommended that culturally defned concepts, such as Caucasian and
facial hair, should be given fexibility for diferent uses, either expanding the category (e.g., facial
hair could become mustache, beard, etc., and be adjusted based on cultural norms) or redefning the
category to be a comparison against the dominant culture (e.g., Caucasian could become dominant
race/ethnicity vs. minority). Along with more specifc instructions, these changes would strengthen
this drawing assessment.

233
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

Part 2b: Sociocultural Identity and School Contexts

The remaining articles that investigated sociocultural identity employed a range of diferent qualita-
tive approaches. The three primary qualitative approaches used were: (1) six ethnographies, including
a general ethnography in an urban high school (Brotman & Mensah, 2013; Gamez & Parker, 2018),
a longitudinal ethnographic case study (Calabrese Barton et al., 2013), a comparative ethnography
(Carlone et al., 2011), a critical ethnographic case study of 16 middle school girls (Tan et al., 2013),
and a three-year ethnographic study of an urban high school Latina teacher (Denerof, 2016); (2)
two case studies, including a collective case study with three elementary preservice teachers (Chen &
Mensah, 2018) and a case study of the historical development of an African American, Caribbean
preservice teacher’s social justice stance (Rivera Maulucci, 2013); and (3) three narratives, including
personal stories and refections from a Caribbean teacher (Grimes, 2013), three African American
teachers in a science methods course (Seiler, 2011), and an arts-based ethnodance as embodied nar-
rative methodology (Chappell & Varelas, 2020). We also categorized nine studies as using general
qualitative methods with the collection and analysis of multiple data sources from African American
children in elementary classrooms (Kane, 2012; Varelas et al., 2011), of interviews collected from
minority ethnic 10–14-year-old students and their parents in London schools (Archer et al., 2012b,
2017, 2019; Wong, 2012, 2015), and of drawings from preservice teachers (Sharma & Honan, 2020;
Mensah, 2011). Those studies that focused on school contexts are discussed in this section; those
studies that focused on teacher education are examined in the next section.
Several studies used sociocultural frameworks of identity that did not necessarily foreground race
and ethnicity; instead, these researchers used race and ethnicity to describe the setting and par-
ticipants of their studies. As an example, Calabrese Barton et al. (2013) conducted a longitudinal
ethnographic case study with 36 girls from two small Midwestern cities, one large East Coast city,
and one Pacifc Ocean city. Each of the girls attended schools that served a large nondominant
population (i.e., students from underrepresented racial, ethnic, or linguistic backgrounds and lower-
income homes). They identifed the girls by socioeconomic status (low, middle), ethnicity (African
American, Latina, Asian, Native Hawaiian, white), and science interest (high, low). The authors built
a conceptual argument for identity trajectories and discussed the ongoing, cumulative, and conten-
tious nature of identity work and the mechanisms that foster critical shifts in trajectories for possible
future selves in science.
In their comparative ethnography, Carlone et al. (2011) conducted a study in two fourth-grade
elementary school classrooms. Though both classrooms of students developed similar levels of sci-
entifc understanding and expressed positive attitudes about learning science, a group of African
American and Latina girls in one classroom expressed disafliation with the identity of a “smart sci-
ence person” even though most of them knew the science equally well or, in one case, better than
their classmates.
Through a yearlong ethnographic investigation of a health-focused New York City public high
school’s HIV/AIDS and sex education program, Brotman and Mensah (2013) illustrated a case in
which 20 12th-grade African American students responded positively to their education on these
topics and largely asserted that school signifcantly infuenced their perspectives and actions related to
sexual health decision-making. The 20 students who consented to participate in the study included
18 females and 2 males, and the participants identifed their ethnicities in the following way: seven
Latino(a), seven African American, three African, and three West Indian. Eight students were born
outside the United States and had lived in the United States between 4 and 17 years. All but one
female had attended the school since the ninth grade. All participants were 17 or 18 years of age,
except one female who was 16.
Two additional studies of identity situated in classrooms employed ethnographic methods as well.
Tan et al. (2013) used a critical ethnographic approach to examine the narrated and embodied

234
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

identities-in-practice of 16 non-white, middle school girls who articulated future career goals in
STEM-related felds. For these girls who desired a STEM-related career, researchers examined the
relationships between their narrated and embodied identities in practice. The four schools across
four research sites located in urban areas had large populations of “students from underrepresented
racial, ethnic or linguistic backgrounds, and lower-income households” (p. 1149). Second, Gamez
and Parker (2018) conducted an ethnographic case study of two newcomer students learning a
reform-based science curriculum taught in English. While the school used the word “newcomer” to
categorize students who had attended an English-speaking school for less than a year, the researchers
conducted interviews in each student’s preferred language choice, which sometimes meant inter-
views were conducted entirely in Spanish or English or a mix of the two. The authors discussed
the relevancy of peer networks and how they can inform both theory and practice around how
newcomers, and emergent bilinguals more broadly, engage in science. The researchers also noted the
importance of being able to combat defcit views of emergent bilingual students as “good science
students” and “good English language learners” within the classroom.
Using arts-based practices, and specifcally ethnodance, Chappell and Varelas (2020) presented a
theoretical argument for ethnodance as a medium for Black students to narrate their evolving science
identities, communicating meanings, interactions, and emotions as well as to construct identities
and artifacts of participating in science classroom communities. The authors focused on Black stu-
dents in an urban high school choreographing a dance performance to capture their science identity
construction. Using ballet, lyrical, and contemporary dances to represent their challenging position
within science, students were ofered a sense of cultural solidarity and joy of rising above the struggle.
Varelas et al. (2011) focused on 25 young, low-income, African American children in frst- to
third-grade classrooms where they experienced varied forms of an interactive, participatory, and
dialogic pedagogy in the context of a yearlong, integrated science-literacy program. The idea of
ideological becoming centered on the ways the children talked about doing school and doing science
(see also Kane, 2012).
Five studies in the UK by Archer, Wong, and colleagues (Archer et al., 2012b, 2017, 2019;
Wong, 2012, 2015) that were connected to the larger ASPIRES project used identity construc-
tions and work with teachers, students, and parents. In Archer et al. (2017), for example, research-
ers investigated identity performance and intelligibility in a nine-month research and development
program conducted with nine teachers from six inner London schools. Except for students in one
of the schools, students came predominantly from working-class backgrounds and a range of ethnic
backgrounds. For example, Urdu/Bengali, Turkish, Polish, and Portuguese were the most frequently
spoken languages among the students. In the Archer et al. (2019) study, researchers drew on Judith
Butler’s concepts of intelligibility and identity as performance to make sense of enactments of subal-
tern (that is, subordinated) urban students within secondary school science.
Wong (2015), a member of the larger research team, conducted an exploratory study using 46
semi-structured interviews with British young people (aged 11–14) from Black Caribbean, Pakistani,
Bangladeshi, Indian, and Chinese ethnic backgrounds. The study explored why careers in science
are not popular aspirations among ethnic minority students, while careers from science are highly
sought after. Wong found that being a scientist was constructed by students as a highly gendered
and racialized profession, which may refect popular discourse of being a scientist as typically for
“white men.” Careers from science, particularly in medicine, appeared popular among some, but not
all, ethnic minority groups, as being a member of the medical staf was considered intrinsically and
extrinsically rewarding.
What these studies ofered is a conceptualization of identity across varied racial, ethnic, and
socioeconomic statuses and across children in diferent grade levels. The ASPIRES project and
other studies mentioned in this category communicated the importance of looking at the unique
experiences of children in science. For instance, the students and parents who were interviewed

235
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

in the Archer et al. (2012b) study were recruited from 11 elementary schools in England. Stu-
dents came from a broad range of socioeconomic classes and ethnic backgrounds, although the
majority were white British (19 boys and 30 girls) followed by South Asian (6 boys and 7 girls),
and Black African/Caribbean (3 boys and 6 girls). The researchers were deliberate in describing
not only the ethnic, racial, and socioeconomic status of the participants but also members of the
research team. They stated that the “interviews were conducted by four of the paper authors,
with the majority of the interviews being conducted by the second author. Of the interview-
ers, three (LA, JdW, BW) are white middle-class women (with English, American, and French
national backgrounds) and one (BWg) is a British-Chinese male Ph.D. student” (Archer et al.,
2012b, p. 972).

Part 2c: Sociocultural Identity, Teacher Education, and Teacher Development

For the seven qualitative, teacher-focused studies in this subcategory, fve highlighted the infu-
ence of both race and ethnicity and other social markers of the participants and discussed the
implications of race and ethnicity within sociocultural frameworks of identity (Chen & Mensah,
2018; Denerof, 2016; Grimes, 2013; Rivera Maulucci, 2011; Seiler, 2011). Two studies uti-
lized the collection and analysis of drawings from preservice teachers (Sharma & Honan, 2020;
Mensah, 2011).
For example, in their collective case study, Chen and Mensah (2018) examined how the teacher
and science teacher identities of three elementary preservice teachers striving to become social jus-
tice educators developed during their frst semester of student teaching after taking a one-semester
science methods course. The three participants self-identifed as Jamaican/Black, Indian American,
and white/Hispanic. The preservice teachers’ identities and histories, university coursework, posi-
tioning in their student teaching classrooms, and opportunities to authentically teach were identifed
as mediating infuences on the development of their teacher and science teacher identities as well as
their perceived ability to teach science for social justice. Their positioning in the classroom dictated
the kinds of actions they took toward becoming social justice teachers. For Gabriela, positioned as
an observer, she identifed how the dominant racial narrative of good and bad children and defcit
views of students of color were reinforced and perpetuated through teacher and student actions
and class activities. She questioned her cooperating teacher’s lack of action to address racist acts and
refected on what steps she would take as a teacher when confronted with these situations in her
future classroom.
Seiler (2011) explored identity hybridization among nondominant science teachers, or two Afri-
can American females and one African American male, as they merged identity narratives around
science and science teaching with who they were out of school. The teachers’ experiences of dis-
identifcation with science in terms of diaspora, or the sense of being taken away from what one
knows and values, generated a “creolized” approach to science teaching in that the teachers created
possibilities for greater student identifcation with science in school, which in turn has the poten-
tial for changing the face of who does science and science itself. A creolized science provides new
opportunities for communication and participation for those who contribute to and employ science
(Elmesky & Seiler, 2007).
Grimes (2013) noted the importance of an educator’s gender, nationality, language, and inter-
ests among other social markers as all permeating the classroom feld and coexisting alongside the
professional role identity. Using several sociocultural theoretical perspectives and identity con-
structs, Grimes explored her Black female Caribbean identity, which she also identifed as a frst-
generation Trinidadian immigrant, and how her identity transformed the science classroom and
created positive resonance for some of her privileged white students who had Caribbean caretakers
at home. As a refexive dialogue with science students situated both within and outside the science

236
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

classroom, the conversations with students who were raised through the hired help of Caribbean
nannies revealed a strong resemblance to the way they perceived their caretakers and Grimes as
their instructor.
Both Sharma and Honan (2020) and Mensah (2011) used drawing tasks with preservice teach-
ers. Sharma and Honan (2020) administered the Draw-A-Scientist Test (DAST) and collected
written descriptions of scientists from 88 Fijian preservice teachers about their perceptions of
science and scientists. While the fndings of the study resonated with similar DAST studies, not
much about race and ethnicity was mentioned in the analysis of the drawings; still, the authors
noted a particular signifcance in a Pacifc context where little research on Fijian education and
curriculum is done. In contrast, Mensah (2011) used several social identity markers to analyze
99 drawings created by elementary preservice teacher candidates. The self-reported gender and
racial/ethnic backgrounds of 48 of the 54 preservice teachers were females: 29 white/Cauca-
sian/European American, 8 Asian/Southeast Asian/Korean/Chinese American, 2 Middle Eastern
American, 2 African American, 1 French American, 1 Native American, 1 Latina American, 1
African American Latina, 1 Indian-South Asian, 1 Italian Lithuanian American Indian, and 1
Caucasian Croatian. There were also six males: four white/Caucasian/European American and
two Asian American. Two preservice teachers were registered with the Ofce of Disabilities, and
all students were fuent and communicated in Standard American English. Findings from this
study of preservice teacher candidates’ drawings indicated that, while many elements of the ste-
reotypical scientist image were prevalent, such an activity can make more explicit teachers’ views
and prior experiences to promote discussions about teacher identity, science teaching, and the
construction of new images and practices for teaching elementary science. The preservice teach-
ers drew images showing their racial and ethnic identities.

Category D: Science Curriculum and Pedagogy

We identified 53 studies that examined science curriculum and pedagogy in intersection with
race and ethnicity. We divided these studies into three subcategories: culturally and linguis-
tically relevant instruction, STEM-focused programs, and curriculum materials for ease of
presentation.

Part 1: Culturally and Linguistically Relevant Instruction

Culturally and linguistically relevant instruction was our largest subcategory, with 24 articles.
These studies described science pedagogy as culturally relevant and/or responsive (Brown & Crip-
pen, 2016; Brown et al., 2021; Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2017; Grimberg & Gummer, 2013;
Hernandez & Shroyer, 2017; Madkins & McKinney de Royston, 2019; McCollough & Ramirez,
2012; Mensah et al., 2018; Ramirez et al., 2016; Underwood & Mensah, 2018; Upadhyay et al.,
2017; Xu et al., 2012; Yoon & Martin, 2019), multicultural (Atwater et al., 2013; Charity Hud-
ley & Mallinson, 2017; Mensah et al., 2018), place-based (Brkich, 2014; Harper, 2017; Schin-
del Dimick, 2016; Sedawi et al., 2020), justice-centered (Atwater et al., 2013; Dimick, 2012;
Morales-Doyle, 2017), culturally adaptive (Shady, 2014), culturally sustaining (Weiland, 2015),
critical constructivist (Wild, 2015), or equity in instruction (Ramnarain, 2011). Although we
recognize these constructs are not synonymous, for the sake of brevity, we refer to them here
as culturally and linguistically relevant instruction. We use this term to encompass asset-based
approaches to instruction that place students’ individual, racial, ethnic, linguistic, and community
resources at their center.
All but two studies in this subcategory (Ramnarain, 2011, in South Africa; Sedawi et al., 2020,
in Israel) were situated in the United States. Still, researchers focused their investigations on a wide

237
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

range of participants. One study investigated Hispanic mothers and their elementary school children
(Weiland, 2015). Six studies foregrounded students (Brkich, 2014; Brown et al., 2021; Harper, 2017;
Sedawi et al., 2020; Upadhyay et al., 2017; Wild, 2015); six focused on students and their teachers
(Dimick, 2012; Grimberg & Gummer, 2013; Morales-Doyle, 2017; Ramnarain, 2011; Schindel
Dimick, 2016; Shady, 2014); and one addressed students, their teachers, administrators, and families
(Madkins & McKinney de Royston, 2019). Eight investigated teachers, either preservice teachers
(Hernandez & Shroyer, 2017; McCollough & Ramirez, 2012; Yoon & Martin, 2019), preservice
teachers and the families they served (Ramirez et al., 2016), practicing teachers (Brown & Crip-
pen, 2016; Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2017; Xu et al., 2012), or both preservice and practicing
teachers (Mensah et al., 2018). And two explored science teacher educators (Atwater et al., 2013;
Underwood & Mensah, 2018).
Eighteen of these 24 studies were qualitative (Atwater et al., 2013; Brkich, 2014; Brown &
Crippen, 2016; Brown et al., 2021; Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2017; Dimick, 2012; Harper,
2017; Hernandez & Shroyer, 2017; Madkins & McKinney de Royston, 2019; Mensah et al., 2018;
Morales-Doyle, 2017; Ramnarain, 2011; Schindel Dimick, 2016; Shady, 2014; Underwood & Men-
sah, 2018; Upadhyay et al., 2017; Weiland, 2015; Xu et al., 2012); three were quantitative (Grim-
berg & Gummer, 2013; Wild, 2015; Yoon & Martin, 2019), and three employed mixed methods
(McCollough & Ramirez, 2012; Ramirez et al., 2016; Sedawi et al., 2020). All included the race
and ethnicity of their participants. Eighteen also provided information about participants’ gender,
language, and/or socioeconomic status (Atwater et al., 2013; Brkich, 2014; Brown et al., 2021;
Dimick, 2012; Grimberg & Gummer, 2013; Hernandez & Shroyer, 2017; Madkins & McKinney
de Royston, 2019; Morales-Doyle, 2017; Ramirez et al., 2016; Ramnarain, 2011; Schindel Dimick,
2016; Sedawi et al., 2020; Shady, 2014; Underwood & Mensah, 2018; Weiland, 2015; Wild, 2015;
Xu et al., 2012; Yoon & Martin, 2019).
As introduced, all 24 studies included a theoretical framework tied at least peripherally to cultur-
ally and linguistically relevant instruction. Atwater et al. (2013), as one example, used the theory of
social constructivism to investigate 20 Black science teacher educators’ experiences, especially those
about their Blackness and their eforts to include multicultural education, equity, and social justice
in their teaching. As a second example, Weiland (2015) employed the theory of culturally sustaining
pedagogy – a pedagogy that sustains learners’ linguistic, literate, and cultural diversity while extend-
ing their repertoires to include dominant language, literacies, and other cultural practices – to inves-
tigate the experiences of Hispanic mothers and their children in an informal science center. Weiland
focused on the ways science centers provide inclusive and afrming contexts to support parents’
eforts to engage their children in STEM learning. As a third example, Madkins and McKinney de
Royston (2019) used culturally relevant pedagogy to examine one African American science teacher
at a middle school that served primarily African American students. They focused their investigation
on the third tenet of culturally relevant pedagogy – developing students’ sociopolitical conscious-
ness – which is often overlooked and can present the greatest challenges for teachers. In particular,
they examined their teacher participants’ political clarity, that is, the clarity that represents a teacher’s
deep understanding of how school, society, and science itself operate to reproduce inequalities and
diferentially privilege the knowledge and experiences of white, middle-class students over those of
racially and economically minoritized students. Madkins and McKinney de Royston chose to study
political clarity not as an in-the-head phenomenon, but as enacted through instruction (see also
Morales-Doyle, 2017).
Many of these studies’ implications addressed teachers and teacher educators. Researchers found
that their preservice and/or practicing teacher participants were able to implement instruction that
was culturally and linguistically relevant (Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2017; Grimberg & Gummer,
2013; Madkins & McKinney de Royston, 2019; McCollough & Ramirez, 2012; Morales-Doyle,
2017; Ramirez et al., 2016; Shady, 2014; Xu et al., 2012; Yoon & Martin, 2019). Indeed, as teachers

238
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

developed robust cultural and linguistic competence, they learned to view diverse students and their
families’ rich and varied identities not as defcits but as resources (Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2017;
Hernandez & Shroyer, 2017; McCollough & Ramirez, 2012; Ramirez et al., 2016; Shady, 2014; Xu
et al., 2012). Still, in four studies, researchers found that teachers struggled to implement all three
tenets of culturally relevant pedagogy, particularly the tenet of sociopolitical or critical consciousness
(Brown & Crippen, 2016; Dimick, 2012; Hernandez & Shroyer, 2017; Mensah et al., 2018). In a
ffth study, researchers found that teacher educators struggled to understand culturally relevant peda-
gogy and how it can be implemented in science classrooms (Underwood & Mensah, 2018).
Also related to teachers and teaching, the authors of 15 studies called for preservice and/or
practicing teachers to be provided additional opportunities to learn about multicultural education,
equity, and social justice so that they could better address the needs of historically underserved and
marginalized students in science classrooms (Atwater et al., 2013; Brkich, 2014; Brown & Crippen,
2016; Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2017; Hernandez & Shroyer, 2017; Madkins & McKinney de
Royston, 2019; McCollough & Ramirez, 2012; Mensah et al., 2018; Morales-Doyle, 2017; Ramirez
et al., 2016; Schindel Dimick, 2016; Shady, 2014; Underwood & Mensah, 2018; Upadhyay et al.,
2017; Yoon & Martin, 2019). Hernandez and Shroyer (2017) highlighted the need for greater racial
and ethnic diversity among science teachers. Likewise, Atwater et al. (2013) emphasized the need for
greater racial and ethnic diversity among science teacher educators.
Further, several implications focused on culturally and linguistically diverse students and their fam-
ilies. Instruction that was culturally and linguistically relevant was argued to position learners, their
families, and/or the larger community as science people – as people who know, do, and produce sci-
ence (Brown et al., 2021; Harper, 2017; Madkins & McKinney de Royston, 2019; Morales-Doyle,
2017; Schindel Dimick, 2016; Upadhyay et al., 2017; Weiland, 2015). Several researchers called for
students to have more experiences learning science grounded in their place, community, and lived
experiences (Brkich, 2014; Brown et al., 2021; Grimberg & Gummer, 2013; Harper, 2017; Schin-
del Dimick, 2016; Xu et al., 2012). Dimick (2012), Madkins and McKinney de Royston (2019),
Morales-Doyle (2017), Upadhyay et al. (2017), and Wild (2015), in particular, emphasized that such
opportunities would enable students to use science more easily as a catalyst for social transformation.
Finally, Morales-Doyle (2017) provided a compelling example of the strengths of culturally and
linguistically relevant instruction. He situated his qualitative study in an advanced chemistry class
of African American and Latinx students in an urban high school, where he served as both teacher
and researcher. He used a justice-centered science pedagogy as his conceptual frame, a framework
built on the traditions of critical pedagogy and culturally relevant pedagogy, to address longstanding
oppressions and inequities in science education across race and class lines. The teacher and students
investigated an environmental social justice issue identifed by their community – the lasting impact
of two recently closed coal power plants on the community’s physical environment – by measuring
the concentrations of lead and mercury in neighborhood soil samples. Morales-Doyle found that
the project both supported students’ academic success and helped to position them as transformative
intellectuals who were knowledgeable about complex science and social justice issues that impacted
their community. In his implications, he elaborated on the theory of justice-centered science educa-
tion as a catalyst for social change. He also emphasized the importance of teachers engaging deeply
and demonstrating solidarity with the students and communities where they teach.

Part 2: STEM-Focused Programs

We found 17 articles to examine STEM-focused programs, broadly defned to include STEM-
focused schools, school-based STEM programs, and informal or afterschool programs centered on
STEM. Fifteen of these studies were situated in the United States (Burgin et al., 2015; Carrier et al.,
2014; Cone, 2012; Dickerson et al., 2014; Jackson & Ash, 2012; Means et al., 2017; Parker et al.,

239
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

2020; Pruitt & Wallace, 2012; Scogin et al., 2018; Sondergeld et al., 2020; Sprague Martinez et al.,
2016; Terzian & Rury, 2014; Tong et al., 2014; Wallace, 2013; Weis et al., 2015); one, in South
Africa (Ramnarain & de Beer, 2013); and one, in the United Kingdom (Archer et al., 2021). Eleven
of these studies investigated students’ views and experiences engaging in such programs (Archer
et al., 2021; Burgin et al., 2015; Dickerson et al., 2014; Means et al., 2017; Parker et al., 2020;
Pruitt & Wallace, 2012; Ramnarain & de Beer, 2013; Sondergeld et al., 2020; Sprague Martinez
et al., 2016; Terzian & Rury, 2014; Tong et al., 2014); three, students and their teachers (Carrier
et al., 2014; Jackson & Ash, 2012; Weis et al., 2015); two, preservice elementary teachers (Cone,
2012; Wallace, 2013); and one, high school science program themselves (Scogin et al., 2018).
The 17, relatively speaking, were evenly distributed across methodologies: Six employed qualita-
tive methods (Archer et al., 2021; Burgin et al., 2015; Cone, 2012; Ramnarain & de Beer, 2013;
Wallace, 2013; Weis et al., 2015); six, quantitative methods (Means et al., 2017; Pruitt & Wallace,
2012; Sondergeld et al., 2020; Sprague Martinez et al., 2016; Terzian & Rury, 2014; Tong et al.,
2014); and fve, mixed methods (Carrier et al., 2014; Dickerson et al., 2014; Jackson & Ash, 2012;
Parker et al., 2020; Scogin et al., 2018). Also in their methods, all but one study (Scogin et al.,
2018) included the race and ethnicity of their student and/or teacher participants in addition to at
least one other demographic marker (i.e., gender, socioeconomic status, language, and/or disability
status).
The theoretical frameworks of studies in this subcategory, as a collective, were not as clearly tied
to race and ethnicity as the other two subcategories under curriculum and instruction. Although not
necessarily foregrounded, all but two studies (Jackson & Ash, 2012; Wallace, 2013) included atten-
tion to race and ethnicity in their framing. As one example, Cone (2012) used the lens of efective
science instruction for students from diverse racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, language, and cultural
backgrounds to investigate diferences in perceptions between preservice elementary teachers who
completed a community-based service learning feld experience and those who did not. As a second
example, Carrier et al. (2014) investigated two elementary schools’ science programs that included
outdoor instruction. Their mixed-methods study was framed by three constructs: teachers’ beliefs
about science teaching and environmental education; school culture; and diferences in environmen-
tal concern, connection, and power tied to gender and ethnicity.
In their discussions and implications, the majority of studies emphasized the importance of
inquiry, authentic, and/or outdoor experiences in facilitating learning for diverse students (Archer
et al., 2021; Burgin et al., 2015; Carrier et al., 2014; Cone, 2012; Dickerson et al., 2014; Jackson &
Ash, 2012; Means et al., 2017; Pruitt & Wallace, 2012; Ramnarain & de Beer, 2013; Scogin et al.,
2018; Sondergeld et al., 2020; Sprague Martinez et al., 2016). Five studies pointed to the need to
attend to racial and ethnic minority students’ science attitudes, identities, and/or sense of belonging
(Archer et al., 2021; Burgin et al., 2015; Carrier et al., 2014; Sondergeld et al., 2020; Sprague Mar-
tinez et al., 2016) and four, to their families and communities (Cone, 2012; Ramnarain & de Beer,
2013; Sondergeld et al., 2020; Sprague Martinez et al., 2016). Six emphasized that teacher education
programs and professional development eforts must better help teachers acquire the knowledge,
dispositions, and/or skills needed to teach science in equitable ways (Carrier et al., 2014; Cone,
2012; Jackson & Ash, 2012; Pruitt & Wallace, 2012; Scogin et al., 2018; Wallace, 2013). Five studies
acknowledged that the teaching and learning of science are shaped by structural and systemic ineq-
uities, including programs ofered, standardized testing required, and/or educational policies put in
place (Carrier et al., 2014; Cone, 2012; Means et al., 2017; Terzian & Rury, 2014; Weis et al., 2015).
As one example of a study on STEM-focused programs, Weis et al. (2015) used the construct
of opportunity structures to frame their three-year study of students, teachers, and counselors at
inclusive STEM-focused high schools in two cities. They defned these structures as the institutional
arrangements – including mathematics and science tracks, course oferings, and course require-
ments – that organize the trajectories of (un)successful educational futures in STEM for low-income,

240
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

underrepresented ethnic minority students. From their qualitative analysis of interviews, classroom
observations, and school and district documents, researchers found that the enhanced opportunities
to learn STEM (e.g., advanced STEM courses, STEM academies) put in place when the STEM-
focused schools frst opened were gradually eroded. Over time, then, because low-income, ethnic
minority students lost access to high-level STEM courses and initiatives relative to those with privi-
lege, they also lost access to opportunities to pursue STEM majors and STEM careers. Weis and
colleagues called for future work to more carefully investigate when and under what circumstances
STEM-focused schools can ofer sustained and authentic high-level opportunities for low-income
and minority students.

Part 3: Curriculum Materials

We identifed 12 studies that focused on the design and/or implementation of curriculum materials.
All 12 were conducted in the United States. The majority of these studies, seven, used quantitative
methods (Chesnutt et al., 2018; Donovan, 2017; Donovan et al., 2019, 2021; Kanter & Konstan-
topoulos, 2010; Rawson & McCool, 2014; Taylor et al., 2015). Three employed mixed methods
(Brown & Livstrom, 2020; Donovan, 2014, 2016), and two used qualitative methods (Matuk et al.,
2021; Suriel & Atwater, 2012). Eleven were situated at the secondary level: fve examined students
(Chesnutt et al., 2018; Donovan, 2014, 2016, 2017; Donovan et al., 2021); three, practicing teachers
(Brown & Livstrom, 2020; Matuk et al., 2021; Suriel & Atwater, 2012); two, students and teachers
in science classrooms (Kanter & Konstantopoulos, 2010; Taylor et al., 2015); and one, students and
adults (Donovan et al., 2019). These 11 identifed their student and/or teacher participants by their
race and ethnicity, and included their gender, socioeconomic status, language, and/or disability status
as well. The fnal study in this subcategory examined images of scientists in children’s nonfction
trade books (Rawson & McCool, 2014).
As with methods employed, a range of theoretical frameworks informed these investigations of
the curriculum. Eleven of these 12 studies explicitly included a focus on race and ethnicity in their
framing (Brown & Livstrom, 2020; Chesnutt et al., 2018; Donovan, 2014, 2016, 2017; Donovan
et al., 2019, 2021; Kanter & Konstantopoulos, 2010; Matuk et al., 2021; Rawson & McCool, 2014;
Suriel & Atwater, 2012). As examples, Brown and Livstrom (2020) used Banks’s (2016) four levels
of multicultural curriculum, which included exploring content from the perspectives of ethnically
and racially diverse groups and making decisions on social justice issues at its upper levels to inform
their study. They connected Banks’s multicultural curriculum typology to the construct of peda-
gogical design capacity to investigate preservice science teachers’ eforts to develop curriculum to
meet the needs of ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse students. Matuk et al. (2021) also
foregrounded pedagogical design capacity – in connection to comic books as a tool for equity,
diversity, and engagement – in framing their study. Suriel and Atwater (2012) used the theory of
social constructivism, with attention to cultural experiences, to ground their investigation of fve
white teachers’ eforts to develop a multicultural science curriculum. Similar to Brown and Livstrom
(2020), in their analysis, they employed an earlier edition of Banks’s levels of multicultural curriculum
in addition to his dominant and desirable characteristics of multicultural studies (Banks, 1995, 2001).
In their discussions and implications, almost all researchers ofered suggestions to improve the
structure and/or substance of curriculum materials to better meet the needs of racially, ethnically,
culturally, and linguistically diverse students (Brown & Livstrom, 2020; Donovan, 2014, 2016, 2017;
Donovan et al., 2019, 2021; Kanter & Konstantopoulos, 2010; Matuk et al., 2021; Rawson &
McCool, 2014). Five emphasized how science curriculum materials impact students’ views and
actions regarding perceived diferences across racial groups because of genetic variation (Donovan,
2014, 2016, 2017; Donovan et al., 2019, 2021). Five discussed the importance of teachers’ knowl-
edge, beliefs, and/or experiences in shaping multicultural curricular choices (Brown & Livstrom,

241
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

2020; Kanter & Konstantopoulos, 2010; Matuk et al., 2021; Suriel & Atwater, 2012; Taylor et al.,
2015). Four ofered recommendations for ways to improve classroom instruction to better support
racially and ethnically diverse students’ learning of science (Chesnutt et al., 2018; Kanter & Konstan-
topoulos, 2010; Matuk et al., 2021; Taylor et al., 2015).
As a concrete example of a curriculum study tied to race and ethnicity, Donovan (2017) exam-
ined how the use of racial terminology in a secondary biology curriculum impacted students’ beliefs
about racial diferences and their development of racial prejudice. The research was situated in the
framework of bio-behavioral essentialism (i.e., the beliefs that people of the same race are biologi-
cally uniform; that races are biologically discrete categories; and that the cause of uniformity within
groups and discreteness across groups has to do with the underlying genetic essence of each group)
and its role in racial prejudice. Students from two secondary schools were randomly assigned within
their classroom to learn about the diferences in human skeletal structure and the prevalence of
genetic diseases from four text-based lessons that either discussed race or lacked racial terminol-
ogy. Through quantitative analysis of student surveys, Donovan found that students from the racial
terminology curricular group developed beliefs about racial diferences based on genetic thinking.
These students also became less interested in socializing across racial lines and less supportive of poli-
cies that reduce racial inequality in education. Donovan argued that the biology curriculum should
be redesigned to teach students both that racial inequality is not the inevitable product of genes and
that racial inequality is perpetuated when people mistakenly believe that races difer cognitively and
behaviorally for genetic reasons.

Category E: Language in Intersection With Race and Ethnicity

We identifed 16 studies that investigated race and ethnicity through the conceptual lens of language.
We understood these articles to span three areas of research related to language in science educa-
tion. Ten investigated multilingual learners or students who speak one or more home languages in
addition to or instead of English (Bravo et al., 2014; Mavuru & Ramnarain, 2020; Okebukola et al.,
2013; Ryu, 2013, 2019; Ryu & Sikorski, 2019; Shaw et al., 2014; Stevenson et al., 2019; Swanson
et al., 2014; Tolbert & Knox, 2016). Related constructs include English language learners, a term
that has been recently criticized as defcit-oriented (Gonzalez-Howard & Suarez, 2021); emergent
bilingual students; and bilingual students. Three explored the connections between science learning
and English language and literacy learning (Clark et al., 2020; Greenleaf et al., 2011; Huerta et al.,
2014). And three examined the use of diferent types of discourse (e.g., everyday, inclusionary/
exclusionary, disciplinary) in the teaching and learning of science (Brown, 2011; Brown et al., 2010;
Gomes et al., 2011).
In terms of research contexts, 13 studies were situated in the United States (Bravo et al., 2014;
Brown, 2011; Brown et al., 2010; Clark et al., 2020; Greenleaf et al., 2011; Huerta et al., 2014; Ryu,
2013, 2019; Ryu & Sikorski, 2019; Shaw et al., 2014; Stevenson et al., 2019; Swanson et al., 2014;
Tolbert & Knox, 2016); one in Brazil (Gomes et al., 2011); one in Nigeria (Okebukola et al., 2013);
and one in South Africa (Mavuru & Ramnarain, 2020). Seven of the 16 studies focused on students
in K–12 schools (Brown, 2011; Brown et al., 2010; Clark et al., 2020; Gomes et al., 2011; Huerta
et al., 2014; Shaw et al., 2014; Stevenson et al., 2019). Six others also included a focus on students –
either students in interaction with their teacher in K–12 classrooms (Greenleaf et al., 2011; Okebu-
kola et al., 2013; Swanson et al., 2014) or students in informal education contexts (Ryu, 2013, 2019;
Ryu & Sikorski, 2019). The fnal three studies examined preservice (Bravo et al., 2014; Tolbert &
Knox, 2016) or practicing (Mavuru & Ramnarain, 2020) teachers. The studies were almost evenly
distributed across research methods: Seven employed qualitative methods (Gomes et al., 2011; Mav-
uru & Ramnarain, 2020; Ryu, 2013, 2019; Stevenson et al., 2019; Swanson et al., 2014; Tolbert &
Knox, 2016); fve, quantitative methods (Bravo et al., 2014; Clark et al., 2020; Greenleaf et al., 2011;

242
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

Huerta et al., 2014; Shaw et al., 2014); and four, mixed methods (Brown, 2011; Brown et al., 2010;
Okebukola et al., 2013; Ryu & Sikorski, 2019). In all but one study (Brown, 2011), researchers
identifed their participants by their race and ethnicity and included their gender, home language(s),
and/or socioeconomic status as well.
The 16 studies used diverse theoretical frameworks to shape their investigations. Given their
placement in this category, a common thread across the frameworks was attention to language.
Twelve explicitly included attention to race and ethnicity in their conceptual framing (Bravo et al.,
2014; Brown, 2011; Brown et al., 2010; Gomes et al., 2011; Greenleaf et al., 2011; Mavuru &
Ramnarain, 2020; Okebukola et al., 2013; Ryu, 2013, 2019; Ryu & Sikorski, 2019; Stevenson
et al., 2019; Tolbert & Knox, 2016). As one example, Brown et al. (2010) used the constructs of
cultural confict, cultural continuity, and discursive identity to argue for the implementation of
disaggregate instruction with ethnically and linguistically diverse students in science classrooms.
Disaggregate instruction was defned as separating science teaching and learning into conceptual
and linguistic components – beginning by teaching content using everyday language and then fol-
lowing with intensive science language instruction. As a second example, Stevenson et al. (2019)
conceptualized resiliency as a strategy developed by their Latina participants using contextual miti-
gating factors to achieve success in STEM education. Contextual mitigating factors include endur-
ing positive or negative macro issues related to equity and diversity, such as gender, socioeconomic
status, and race, that contribute to or inhibit learning opportunities, access to school resources,
and engagement in meaningful educational experiences (see again Gallard Martínez et al., 2019).
Positive contextual mitigating factors are associated with resiliency and can be used as tools of lib-
eration. As a fnal example, Okebukola et al. (2013) drew from constructs of science language and
mother tongue (i.e., frst, or home, language) to investigate the mis/alignment between Nigerian
policy and practice in teachers’ use of the mother tongue to teach science in primary classrooms.
In their discussions and implications, researchers again underscored the importance of lan-
guage, explaining how language helps to shape science learning, an emphasis to be expected
given the studies’ common focus on language. Twelve studies suggested ways science instruction
can be revised both to increase diverse students’ access to opportunities to produce language and
to increase the likelihood that students’ ideas, once articulated, will be valued by themselves,
their peers, and their teachers (Bravo et al., 2014; Brown, 2011; Brown et al., 2010; Clark et al.,
2020; Gomes et al., 2011; Ryu, 2013, 2019; Ryu & Sikorski, 2019; Shaw et al., 2014; Steven-
son et al., 2019; Swanson et al., 2014; Tolbert & Knox, 2016). Seven emphasized how race and
ethnicity in interaction with language and sometimes gender shape students’ understanding of
who counts as competent science people (Brown, 2011; Clark et al., 2020; Greenleaf et al.,
2011; Ryu, 2013, 2019; Ryu & Sikorski, 2019; Stevenson et al., 2019). Two studies called for
additional research on the successes and challenges of encouraging teacher and student use of
home languages in science classrooms (Mavuru & Ramnarain, 2020; Okebukola et al., 2013).
As one example of a study in this category, Ryu and Sikorski (2019) provided insight into
the ways language intersects with race – and gender – to shape the teaching and learning of sci-
ence. Researchers focused their investigation on an informal science program that was designed
for Korean immigrant students and that encouraged them to participate in sensemaking activi-
ties using their funds of knowledge, including the full range of their linguistic resources and
preferences. Ryu and Skiorski used the construct of a talk repertoire to provide a fexible way
of characterizing how students talk and act in diferent contexts, across time and space, and
within and across diferent racial and ethnic groups. They employed mixed methods to study
one student’s verbal participation across program activities. Through a quantitative analysis of
video records, researchers found that Selena talked more often and for longer periods over time.
However, through a qualitative analysis of these data, they also found that Selena’s use of hedging
devices and preference for mixing Korean with English limited her opportunities to engage in

243
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

collaborative sense-making. Because institutional labels (i.e., girl and English learner), social hier-
archies, and power relationships went unchallenged by both the instructors and the larger pro-
gram, Selena’s ideas were not taken up by her peers. This was the case even though the learning
context was for a single ethnic group and the ideas expressed by Selena carried scientifc merit.
Ryu and Skiorski underscored the need for teachers and researchers to attend to students’ race
more closely in interaction with gender and language profciency in teaching toward equity – to
attempt to address rather than perpetuate the marginalization of females and language minority
students in talking and doing science.

Category F: Aspiration and Motivation to Learn and Teach Science

We placed 16 articles in our category of aspiration, motivation, and related constructs. Ten of these
articles were situated in the United States (Andersen & Ward, 2014; Bolshakova et al., 2011; Bon-
nette et al., 2019; Chapman et al., 2019; Dorph et al., 2018; Ganchorre & Tomanek, 2012; Lofgran
et al., 2015; Maltese & Tai, 2011; Moseley & Taylor, 2011; Snodgrass Rangel et al., 2020); the
other articles were part of a longitudinal study conducted in the United Kingdom (Archer et al.,
2012a; Dewitt & Archer, 2015; DeWitt et al., 2016; Dewitt, Archer et al., 2013; DeWitt et al.,
2014; Dewitt, Osborne et al., 2013). The majority of articles, 13, focused on students: fve exam-
ined secondary school students (Andersen & Ward, 2014; Bonnette et al., 2019; Dorph et al., 2018;
Maltese & Tai, 2011; Snodgrass Rangel et al., 2020); three, primary, or elementary, students (Archer
et al., 2012a; Dewitt, Archer et al., 2013; Dewitt, Osborne et al., 2013); and fve, both primary
and secondary students (Chapman et al., 2019; Dewitt & Archer, 2015; DeWitt et al., 2014, 2016;
Lofgran et al., 2015). A smaller number included teachers as participants: Bolshakova et al. (2011)
investigated middle school teachers and their students; Moseley and Taylor (2011), secondary school
teachers; and Ganchorre and Tomanek (2012), prospective secondary school teachers. The majority
of these studies, 11, were quantitative (Andersen & Ward, 2014; Bonnette et al., 2019; Dewitt &
Archer, 2015; DeWitt et al., 2014, 2016; Dewitt, Osborne et al., 2013; Dorph et al., 2018; Lofgran
et al., 2015; Maltese & Tai, 2011; Moseley & Taylor, 2011; Snodgrass Rangel et al., 2020). Of the
other fve, four were qualitative (Archer et al., 2012a; Bolshakova et al., 2011; Dewitt, Archer et al.,
2013; Ganchorre & Tomanek, 2012), and one employed mixed methods (Chapman et al., 2019). All
explicitly attended to participants’ race and ethnicity – in addition to gender and sometimes language
status and/or socioeconomic status – in their methods.
In examining their theoretical frames on aspiration or motivation broadly conceived, all 16 stud-
ies were found to include race and ethnicity in some aspect of their conceptual framing and/or
literature review. As one example, Archer, Dewitt, and colleagues used the construct of aspirations
in science – as connected to science attitudes, identities, family habitus, and/or science capital – to
investigate student science and career aspirations and to identify factors that contribute to or hinder
the development of aspirations in science (Archer et al., 2012a; Dewitt & Archer, 2015; DeWitt
et al., 2014, 2016; Dewitt, Archer et al., 2013; Dewitt, Osborne et al., 2013). As a second example,
four sets of researchers included students’ and/or teachers’ sense of self-efcacy to inform their studies
(Bolshakova et al., 2011; Chapman et al., 2019; Lofgran et al., 2015; Moseley & Taylor, 2011). As
a third example, two sets of researchers used expectancy-value theory to ground their investigations
of students: Andersen and Ward (2014) studied Black, Hispanic, and white students, and Snodgrass
Rangel et al. (2020) examined underrepresented students in STEM, including students from racially
minoritized populations. As a fnal example, Dorph et al. (2018) drew from both self-efcacy and
expectancy-value theory, in addition to the construct of fascination, to organize their study. They
examined middle school student science learning activation as consisting of competency beliefs,
valuing science, and fascination with science in addition to scientifc sense-making and as predicting
STEM career preferences.

244
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

On a related note, Snodgrass Rangel et al. (2020) cautioned readers that motivational theories,
like expectancy-value theory (EVT), may be better suited to explaining the choices and achieve-
ment of white and Asian students than racially minoritized students. They elaborated, “Expecting
that EVT as a theory should perform similarly across racial and ethnic groups is colorblind because it
assumes that students have similar experiences with and beliefs about science and math when research
suggests this is not the case” (p. 1061). This was one of the few instances where researchers in this
category explicitly stated their theoretical framework might be limited in its attention to and ability
to make sense of race and ethnicity in their investigation.
The implications of these studies can be divided between recommendations to enhance student
aspiration and motivation and recommendations to strengthen teacher motivation and self-efcacy.
Concerning students, Bolshakova et al. (2011) emphasized the positive impact efective science teach-
ers can have on Hispanic students’ self-efcacy and achievement. Andersen and Ward (2014) encour-
aged teachers to work to strengthen Black and Hispanic students’ sense of congruence between their
identities and STEM identities, their awareness of how science and mathematics courses connect to
their future goals for career and college, and their interests in STEM subjects more generally. Eight
studies called for educators, policymakers, and researchers to better highlight the diversity and range
of individuals who are scientists and the diversity and range of science-related careers to ofer more
opportunities for students from poor backgrounds to fnd a place for themselves within science and
a place for science within their own developing identities (Archer et al., 2012a; Dewitt & Archer,
2015; DeWitt et al., 2014, 2016; Dewitt, Archer et al., 2013; Dewitt, Osborne et al., 2013; Dorph
et al., 2018; Maltese & Tai, 2011). Two other studies emphasized the importance of providing more
opportunities for students from underrepresented groups to participate in informal science experi-
ences to increase their motivation to engage in STEM learning (Bonnette et al., 2019; Chapman
et al., 2019). Further, two studies called for additional research on ethnically and racially diverse
students to identify unexplored diferences and nuances in their STEM beliefs, afnities, and aspira-
tions (Dorph et al., 2018; Snodgrass Rangel et al., 2020). Finally, Chapman et al. (2019) emphasized
the importance of considering the holistic and cumulative efects of social, cultural, historical, and
political factors that have led to the marginalization of students from underrepresented groups, such
as Hispanic females.
Concerning teachers, two studies recommended practicing teachers in urban schools or with high
minority class ethnicity distribution (CED) be better supported to prevent feelings of low science
teaching efcacy, helplessness, and demoralization (Bolshakova et al., 2011; Moseley & Taylor, 2011).
Ganchorre and Tomanek (2012) encouraged teacher educators to begin by cultivating preservice
teachers’ dispositions of care and compassion as starting points to promote their success in working
with diverse students, regardless of the preservice teachers’ ethnic background and experiences.
A substantive example of an article in this category is the mixed-methods study by Chapman et al.
(2019). In their study, Chapman et al. investigated the efects of a STEM summer camp on the learn-
ing outcomes of 434 K–12 students, approximately 90% of whom identifed as Hispanic, Mexican
American, or Latinx. Researchers drew together several constructs to frame their investigation of
why there are so few Hispanic females in STEM. These constructs included the achievement gap; the
efects of stereotypes and gender bias; the leaky STEM pipeline; and student self-efcacy, motivation,
and self-determination toward STEM. Data analyzed included pre-and post-test scores of all students
and interviews of randomly selected Hispanic female students. Researchers found that Hispanic
middle school girls had signifcantly higher achievement scores than Hispanic middle school boys,
even though a gap in camp participation by gender had begun to emerge. By high school, however,
females were less likely than their male counterparts to participate in the STEM summer camp.
They also had signifcantly lower pretest scores than males. Researchers concluded that informal
STEM opportunities, such as this STEM summer camp, could help to mitigate decreases in Hispanic
females’ interest, participation, and academic achievement from elementary to high school.

245
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

Category G: Teacher Perceptions and Experiences

We identifed 14 studies that attended to race and ethnicity in their examination of teacher percep-
tions and experiences teaching science. All of these studies focused on preservice and/or practicing
teachers in the United States: Six investigated practicing secondary teachers (Bianchini et al., 2015;
Brenner et al., 2016; Marco-Bujosa et al., 2021; Nehmeh & Kelly, 2018; Rivera Maulucci, 2010;
Titu et al., 2018); one, practicing elementary teachers (Lee et al., 2016); two, preservice secondary
teachers (Marco-Bujosa et al., 2020; Mark et al., 2020); one, preservice elementary teachers (Subra-
maniam, 2013); and four, both practicing and preservice teachers (Liou et al., 2010; Liou & Lawrenz,
2011; Southerland et al., 2011; Zapata, 2013). All but three of these studies employed qualitative
methods (Bianchini et al., 2015; Brenner et al., 2016; Marco-Bujosa et al., 2020, 2021; Mark et al.,
2020; Nehmeh & Kelly, 2018; Rivera Maulucci, 2010; Southerland et al., 2011; Subramaniam,
2013; Titu et al., 2018; Zapata, 2013); the remaining studies were quantitative (Lee et al., 2016; Liou
et al., 2010; Liou & Lawrenz, 2011). All but one study (Titu et al., 2018) identifed participants by
their race and ethnicity. Twelve included at least one other demographic characteristic, such as gen-
der, socioeconomic status, or language status (Bianchini et al., 2015; Brenner et al., 2016; Lee et al.,
2016; Liou et al., 2010; Liou & Lawrenz, 2011; Marco-Bujosa et al., 2020, 2021; Mark et al., 2020;
Nehmeh & Kelly, 2018; Rivera Maulucci, 2010; Subramaniam, 2013; Zapata, 2013).
With the type of teachers investigated, theoretical lenses employed to frame teachers’ perceptions
and experiences varied. Although all but one (Nehmeh & Kelly, 2018) integrated race and ethnic-
ity into their conceptual frame, few studies centered their framework on race and ethnicity. As one
example of these latter studies, Mark et al. (2020) used critical discourse analysis, focusing on the
use of language to create and sustain power hierarchies, to investigate preservice secondary science
teachers’ experiences in a culturally diverse, urban high school. In particular, these researchers inves-
tigated how preservice secondary science teachers positioned themselves in relation to their clinical
experiences in a culturally diverse context and research-based defcit beliefs about culturally diverse
students and their families. Rivera Maulucci (2010), as a second example, used the dialectical rela-
tionship between authentic caring – focused on the individual and collective needs, interests, linguistic
resources, and cultures of youth and teachers – and aesthetic caring – focused on institutional pro-
gramming, rules, policies, procedures, and accountability mechanisms – within a larger social justice
framework to guide her study. She employed these constructs in tracing the developmental trajectory
of a beginning science teacher across her frst two years at an urban middle school.
In their discussions and implications, several researchers emphasized that teacher participants
grew in their understanding of racially and ethnically diverse students and/or culturally and linguis-
tically relevant instruction as a result of their teacher education or professional development expe-
riences (Bianchini et al., 2015; Brenner et al., 2016; Lee et al., 2016; Marco-Bujosa et al., 2020;
Rivera Maulucci, 2010; Titu et al., 2018). Two studies found teacher participants grew to view the
parents of their culturally and linguistically diverse students in a more positive light (Lee et al., 2016;
Mark et al., 2020), while one noted that teachers experienced more growth in their understanding
of themselves and their students than of their students’ families and communities (Brenner et al.,
2016). Three studies recommended closer examination of non-white or ethnic minority preservice
and practicing teachers to better understand their needs, perspectives, and strengths (Liou et al.,
2010; Liou & Lawrenz, 2011; Subramaniam, 2013). Several studies called for teachers to work
to adopt a more critical stance: Mark et al. (2020) recommended that teachers critically examine
the beliefs they have about science teaching and learning; Marco-Bujosa et al. (2020, 2021) sug-
gested that teachers align their professional identity with teaching science for social justice, with
an emphasis on identifying structural injustices in schools; Rivera Maulucci (2010) recommended
that teachers broaden their scope of caring to include a critical awareness of and commitment to
transform structural and institutional sources of inequality in schools; and Zapata (2013) advised

246
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

that teachers help their students interrogate implicit and problematic sociocultural and gendered
perspectives about science in classrooms. Bianchini et al. (2015) and Southerland et al. (2011)
encouraged teacher educators, professional developers, and researchers to move away from blaming
teacher participants for their reluctance to engage in explorations of equity and diversity, and toward
more careful consideration of the opportunities and constraints aforded teachers by the professional
learning contexts themselves.
As a substantive example of research in this category, Subramaniam (2013) merged conceptions of
teaching science with role constructs used to describe and distinguish minority preservice teachers
from their white counterparts (i.e., role model, social transformer, and cultural mediator) to frame
the investigation of fve ethnic minority preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions and enact-
ments of teaching science. The researcher qualitatively analyzed diferent types of data, including
participants’ drawings of a teacher teaching science, narratives, and semi-structured interviews as
well as observations of microteaching sessions and their self-reviews of these sessions. Participants’
conceptions of teaching were found to be similar – tied to similar past educational experiences situ-
ated within similar educational contexts. Participants in this study were also found to conceptual-
ize teaching content to their students in constructivist ways, with science content linked to home
experiences, students’ ideas, hands-on activities, and group work. Subramaniam called for teacher
educators to better support ethnic minority preservice teachers in sharing their K–12 experiences.
They also recommend better support for both ethnic minority and white preservice teachers on how
these experiences can productively inform conceptions of teaching science.

Category H: Assessments
We identifed fve articles that ft the category of assessments; this was our smallest category of
articles. All of the studies were conducted in the United States. Four of the fve focused on students:
elementary school students (Maerten-Rivera et al., 2010; Noble et al., 2012), elementary and middle
school students (Quinn & Cooc, 2015), or high school students (You et al., 2021). The ffth exam-
ined the construct validity of an assessment itself (You et al., 2022). Four of the fve also employed
quantitative analyses (Maerten-Rivera et al., 2010; Quinn & Cooc, 2015; You et al., 2021, 2022).
The ffth used qualitative methods to investigate a small number of students’ understanding of test
items (Noble et al., 2012). Further, four of the fve examined students’ race and ethnicity in addi-
tion to at least one other factor, such as gender, language status, socioeconomic status, or disability
status (Maerten-Rivera et al., 2010; Quinn & Cooc, 2015; You et al., 2021, 2022). The ffth study
examined students from historically nondominant communities, without specifying students’ race
and ethnicity (Noble et al., 2012).
In their conceptual framing, authors presented possible explanations for diferences in assess-
ment scores by racial and ethnic groups. Maerten-Rivera et al. (2010), for example, employed three
constructs as their frame: student background factors (e.g., race or ethnicity, gender) that infuence
science achievement; school characteristics that infuence science achievement; and the relationship
across reading, mathematics, and science achievement. Noble et al. (2012) investigated assessments
using a sociocultural lens, viewing science tests as grounded in the language and cultural norms of
students who are European American, native English-speaking, and from the middle class. They
explained how the linguistic mismatch between the features of language included in standardized
tests and the features of language that students from historically nondominant communities use inter-
feres with the performance of these students. As a third example, Quinn and Cooc (2015) framed
their study using the construct of a science achievement gap between racial/ethnic groups and by
gender. They identifed diferences in socioeconomic status, school quality, and mathematics and
reading achievement as contributing to gaps by race/ethnicity, and cultural norms and mathematics
achievement as contributing to gaps by gender.

247
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

Although small in number, these studies drew a wide range of implications. Maerten-Rivera
et al. (2010) emphasized that the efects of ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status on science
achievement were smaller than disability status and language status; language status had the largest
efect on science achievement. Quinn and Cooc (2015) noted that science achievement gaps by race/
ethnicity, as well as by gender, remained stable or narrowed as students moved through elementary
and middle school. However, when prior mathematics and reading achievement, socioeconomic
status, and classroom fxed efects were taken into account, racial/ethnic gaps in science achievement
at the middle school level were not statistically signifcant. Noble et al. (2012) and You et al. (2022)
suggested that test items are biased against students from historically nondominant communities. An
important goal for the research community, Noble et al. (2012) underscored, should be to develop
alternative measures of science knowledge that are responsive to students’ backgrounds and experi-
ences and that allow them multiple ways to demonstrate what they know. Quinn and Cooc (2015)
reminded readers that eliminating science achievement gaps to improve the rates of STEM entry
and persistence for ethnic minorities and girls cannot be the sole goal; eforts to correct inequities
experienced by ethnic minorities and women in the STEM workforce must be implemented as well.

Discussion and Implications: Moving Ahead

As stated in the Introduction, this review is an extension of the work done by Parsons (2014) in an
earlier handbook. The purpose of conducting this current review was to determine our progress in
identifying the ways the structured and systemic construction of race and ethnicity has been taken
up in science education research. We systematically unpacked and synthesized the literature, using
Parsons’s recommendations for future research on race and ethnicity in science education as the
organizing structure for this review. Parsons recommended that (1) critical theories be used alone or
with other theories to frame studies of race and ethnicity, (2) mixed methods be used more regularly
to investigate the complex nature of race and ethnicity constructs, and (3) studies seek to transform
science education to become more equitable and socially just. We take those recommendations now
as discussion points for the fndings of this current review and address implications and suggestions
for future research.

Recommendations for Mixed Methods

Referring again to Table 8.1, there were markedly few studies that employed mixed methods, the
second of Parsons’s (2014) three recommendations for future research in the feld. With so few
mixed-methods studies, except for the team of researchers from the UK (see Archer, Osborne,
DeWitt, and colleagues), it is difcult to identify the strengths or the added benefts such studies
yield to understand the structured and systemic construction of race and ethnicity more thoroughly
in the United States and other countries. This is important to know, as explained in the Introduc-
tion, because countries conceptualize race and ethnicity diferently and it is a moving construct. As
a collective, these studies more often focused their investigations on student participants than on
teachers and/or their families. For the quantitative component, almost all used surveys and/or tests;
only a handful analyzed data from observations, video records, or written work. For the qualita-
tive component, researchers most often analyzed interviews; some examined written work, video
records, and/or observations.
Therefore, one recommendation to move the feld forward is to conduct more mixed-methods
studies in science education that focus on race and ethnicity. This could better determine what
kinds of questions about race and ethnicity mixed-methods research may ofer for deeper analysis
and better determine the benefts of using mixed methods to understand race and ethnicity in sci-
ence education. A second, related recommendation is to broaden both the participants invited to

248
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

participate in studies (more on this next) and the kinds of data analyzed in mixed-methods research
toward the goal of more deeply understanding race and ethnicity in science education. At the same
time, we understand the challenges of conducting quality mixed-methods studies, particularly for
large-scale studies. There are challenges to data collection and data analysis alone as well as the need
to have researchers with expertise in both qualitative and quantitative design and integrating the two
(Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011). Conducting mixed-methods studies may also require extra time,
resources, and funding. Thus, as a third recommendation, we encourage science educators to col-
laborate and work with other researchers across diverse areas of expertise and apply for funding to
conduct mixed-methods studies of race and ethnicity in science education. Opportunities for data
sharing may support research teams coming together to understand race and ethnicity across and
within varying contexts, settings, countries, individuals, and groups. We think it would be trans-
formative for scholars across countries, contexts, and expertise to develop research projects that will
contribute to research designs that will transform science education.

Recommendations for Theory and Transformation

We next turn to Parsons’s (2014) two other recommendations: What does it mean to theorize about
race and ethnicity, and what does it mean to transform science? Phinney (1990) discussed that eth-
nicity is often used to describe group members who share a common set of cultural traditions, atti-
tudes, and values, whereas race often refers to biological and physical traits that unite a group (such as
skin color or hair type; Quintana, 1998). Furthermore, certain groups are more likely to be described
in terms of their ethnic group (e.g., Latinx, Asian Americans), whereas others are more commonly
referred to as a racial group (e.g., African Americans). It is these distinctions that are not made to a
large degree in the studies we reviewed. This indicates that more theorization about race and ethnic-
ity in science education research is needed. In some cases, the race and ethnicity of participants were
not mentioned, thus reinforcing the assumption that race and ethnicity are colorblind (Bonilla-Silva,
2017; Delgado & Stefancic, 2017), or invisible and irrelevant, to the study.
Critical race theory and intersectionality ft the recommendations for critical theories and out-
comes to transform science education to become more equitable and socially just. We note the use
of critical race theory as a critical theory was used alone and with other theories to frame race and
ethnicity in the 22 studies we reviewed in two categories. Many of the studies employed tenets of
critical race theory, focusing on counternarratives that challenge master narratives and highlight
the experiences of people of color (Solórzano & Yosso, 2002a; Zamudio et al., 2010). In particu-
lar, some of the studies in this group used counternarratives in telling the experiences of African
American youth and adults. The studies also promoted the importance of centering race and racism
when creating learning experiences across K–12 and teacher education contexts and for people of
color. In critical race theory and intersectionality studies, researchers expanded critical race theory
to focus on intersectionality, and some who did not explicitly use intersectionality still discussed
how the race and ethnicity of their participants intersected with other identifers to infuence their
experiences.
The implications for this collection of studies in critical race theory as well as critical race theory
and intersectionality emphasize the importance of engaging in research that addresses larger systemic
issues in science education and being critically conscious and responsive to how race and racism
impact science education. The studies in these two categories used a variety of research methods and
approaches, with critical race theory as a theoretical framework, and sometimes in collaboration with
other theoretical frameworks. However, as introduced earlier, the explicit theorization of race and
ethnicity was not as well developed or theorized as expected. Though critical race theory emphasizes
the social construction of race, both analyses of race and ethnicity were included tangentially in the
discussion and implications of the fndings of most of these studies.

249
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

In the subcategories connected to sociocultural identity, studies reviewed identifed how the race
and ethnicity of the participants also infuenced their teaching or learning of science, their develop-
ment as science teachers or learners, and thus their identity development. With a few exceptions
(e.g., Chapman & Feldman, 2017), the sociocultural frameworks the researchers used were not spe-
cifcally focused on race and ethnicity. Unlike the previous categories, race and ethnicity were not
central to the theoretical and methodological bases of these studies.
We note that language and terms such as “nondominant”, “nondominant backgrounds”, “non-
white”, and “minority” were used in several studies – both in the sociocultural identity subcategories
and other categories – to describe the racial and ethnic backgrounds of the participants (e.g., Bonnette
et al., 2019; Calabrese Barton et al., 2013; Seiler, 2011; Tan et al., 2013). These descriptors were used
in the abstract and/or throughout the other sections of the studies; however, in the methods, specifc
racial and ethnic identity markers were included. Employing the language of “nondominant” or “non-
white” calls attention to the implicit bias of inferiority of racial and ethnic groups as compared to a
white dominant racial frame of white supremacy (see Rivera Maulucci & Mensah, 2015). Furthermore,
in Omi and Winant’s (1994) diferential-racialization hypothesis, they asserted that each group of color
is racialized in diferent ways from others. Thus, to be racially and ethnically specifc to the racial and
ethnic identity of the participants or groups in research elevates them and, not in comparison to another
group, distinguishes them based upon their ethnic and racial identity. These distinctions are important
as language, naming, and representation have difering meanings in specifc contexts (Kivisto & Croll,
2012). Even within community-based research, the broader community’s understanding of how race
and ethnicity impact relationships within and among members also has to consider power dynamics in
developing relationships while also understanding science and its role in the community.
On a related note, for those studies that employed frameworks often used where race and ethnicity
are not mentioned, such as attitudes and beliefs, language as central to learning, or gaps in science
achievement, few recognized the potential limitations of their frames. In other words, few researchers
acknowledged the theories or concepts they employed might limit what they were able to see and
understand about race and ethnicity given the constructs’ origins and purposes. As a rare example,
Snodgrass Rangel et al. (2020) noted that motivational theories, like the theory of expectancy-value
they employed, might better explain the views, experiences, and actions of some racial and ethnic
groups than others.
From these indications, there is still much work to do in theorizing race and ethnicity in science
education. We acknowledge that there has been advancement regarding race more than ethnicity,
and this is due mainly to authors’ use of critical race theory and intersectionality; there were two
categories dedicated to critical race theory in this review. Still, even with critical race theory and
intersectionality used as theoretical frameworks, more attention to intersectional analysis beyond the
naming of racial and ethnic groups and the inclusion of gender, socioeconomic status, frst language,
or nationality in identifying the participants is suggested. Many of the studies reported racial and eth-
nic backgrounds of participants, as we stated, but did not go further in acknowledging how racial and
ethnic markers intersect to reveal deeper power and systemic issues in science education, even in how
groups are excluded from science. In particular, research studies are needed to see how intersectional
identities reveal themselves in transforming science teacher or science learner identities for both men
and women, or boys and girls (see again Mark, 2018), or people who identify as queer, nonbinary,
or nonconforming. Research studies on intersectionality or identity could also beneft from mixed-
methods and quantitative designs, which were largely absent from both categories of study. Science
educators may learn from scholars in higher education who use QuantCrit methods (Covarrubias,
2011; López et al., 2018). QuantCrit quantitative methodologies anchored in the understandings
of critical race theory (Solórzano et al., 2005). Without essentializing groups, we can learn more
about racial and ethnic group identities, along with multiple and intersecting identities that overlap
in complex ways (Crenshaw, 2016).

250
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

We also recommend that researchers acknowledge that issues related to race and ethnicity, as well
as language and other social markers, are highly contentious in our society. Thus, we must also con-
textualize research by including the perspectives of who is doing the research, in addition to who the
participants are, with the description of the context in which the work is conducted. This allows the
reader to become cognizant of the culturally situated meanings that we bring to our research endeav-
ors and to appreciate the complexity in the lives of those who participate in our studies, including
the researchers. In this way, these acknowledgments raise our level of sociopolitical consciousness that
must be understood as we transform the feld.
Further, to move toward transforming science education research, we adopt the defnition of
transformative learning theory explicated by Mezirow (2000) in adult education to apply to science
education:

Transformative learning is the process by which we transform our taken-for-granted frames

of reference (meaning perspectives, habits of mind, mind-sets) to make them more inclusive,
discriminating, open, emotionally capable of change, and refective so that they may gener-
ate beliefs and opinions that will prove more true or justifed to guide action.
(pp. 7–8)

Though Mezirow’s work has been critiqued for missing the social aspect of transformative learn-
ing, this dimension must be part of science education research without exception. Therefore, to
move ahead and transform science education so that it is more equitable and socially just, the idea
of transformative learning for the collective mindset of the feld is for science educators to uncover
those taken-for-granted frames of reference, theoretical notions, and ideologies, and question them.
It involves being more open about why we conduct research and what the fndings of our research
reveal, or do not reveal, for the participants, communities, and contexts in which we do our work,
particularly for and within communities of color, multilingual communities, and communities where
issues of race and ethnicity and other intersecting variables are most salient. It also requires difer-
ent approaches and questions to our research – how we present the fndings, what the implications
of these fndings are, and what they mean for all involved in the research process. In other words,
through our research, what additional truths are made evident and for whom? How does our research
allow us to engage in discourse and action more intently, purposefully, and justly? How do our
research and fndings impact others? How is our work the catalyst for transformation?

Limitations and Conclusion

We acknowledge the tremendous work of scholars and researchers to investigate race and ethnicity
in science education. The feld has grown and continues to grow in its attention to the wide range of
questions that impact teaching, learning, and policy in science education. We close our tracking of this
growth in research by noting two limitations to our review. One limitation in writing this chapter was
its scope: We considered work from ten journals published from 2010 to 2020, with focused attention
on the terms “race” and “ethnicity”. Thus, we looked at only a subset of articles published in science
education on race and ethnicity over time, and only from the ten journals we selected for analysis.
We recognize that there are relevant studies in other journals as well as relevant studies that employed
other terms besides race and ethnicity that could have been included in this review. In particular, we
recognize that our selection of these ten journals limited our examination of studies conducted in
countries other than the United States. We also recognize that our selection of these journals resulted
in the omission of alternative and transformational studies that were published in other venues.1
A second limitation that also sets a basis for future work is that we did not distinguish between those
studies that included a theoretical or conceptual framework and those that only ofered a literature

251
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

review. Distinguishing between these two types of studies – providing a more detailed examination
of the presence or absence of clearly articulated frameworks – could enhance the conceptualization
of studies and provide greater insight into the strengths such frameworks add to research on race and
ethnicity. We were able to capture some of the theoretical frameworks, such as critical race theory,
feminist theory, and sociocultural theory, in categorizing studies; still, by more accurately indicating
the range of theoretical perspectives used across our categories, we would have provided yet another
vantage point to determine how far and in what additional ways we may move the feld forward to
introduce theories that resonate well with race and ethnicity, in addition to language.
Despite these limitations, we intend this review to be a source of information and inspiration to
current researchers committed to furthering eforts to transform science, science teaching, science
learning, and science policy. We have ofered several suggestions on ways to foreground more clearly
the construction of race and ethnicity in science education research. These recommendations include
conducting more mixed-methods studies across contexts; acknowledging the intersectionality of
researchers, participants, and contexts for looking at race and ethnicity; and working more intention-
ally to transform science education as currently envisioned and enacted. These recommendations
build on those ofered by Parsons (2014) in her unpacking and critically synthesizing the literature on
race and ethnicity in science education. Although we have made strides since her review, her closing
call to action remains salient today:

Now is the time to engage and generate science education research and scholarship on race
and ethnicity that informs and impacts future research, policy, and practice. The science
education community has the capacity to engage race and ethnicity. Does the community
have the will and the courage to engage in such a high-risk endeavor?
(p. 183)

As a feld, we have made progress since the last handbook was published in attending to race and
ethnicity as a feld. Now, what more can we do as a community to further this work? What will the
next chapter on unpacking race and ethnicity in science education say about the feld’s movement
and transformation in this regard?

Note
1 A list of other journals to consider for future review include the following: Science Education International
(SEI) by the International Council of Association for Science Education (ICASE); the Canadian Journal of
Science, Mathematics and Technology Education; and the African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and
Technology Education (AJRMSTE). We also suggest journals such as Urban Education, Race and Ethnicity, and
The Urban Review.

References
Alexakos, K., Pride, L. D., Amat, A., Tsetsakos, P., Lee, K. J., Paylor-Smith, C., Zapata, C., Wright, S., & Smith,
T. (2016). Mindfulness and discussing “thorny” issues in the classroom. Cultural Studies of Science Education,
11(3), 741–769. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-015-9718-0
Andersen, L., & Ward, T. J. (2014). Expectancy-value models for the stem persistence plans of ninth-grade,
high-ability students: A comparison between Black, Hispanic, and white students. Science Education, 98(2),
216–242. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21092
Archer, L., Dawson, E., DeWitt, J., Godec, S., King, H., Mau, A., Nomikou, E., & Seakins, A. (2017). Killing
curiosity? An analysis of celebrated identity performances among teachers and students in nine London sec-
ondary science classrooms. Science Education, 101(5), 741–764. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21291
Archer, L., Dawson, E., Seakins, A., & Wong, B. (2016). Disorientating, fun or meaningful? Disadvantaged
families’ experiences of a science museum visit. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(4), 917–939. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11422-015-9667-7

252
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

Archer, L., Dewitt, J., & Osborne, J. (2015). Is science for us? Black students’ and parents’ views of science and
science careers. Science Education, 99(2), 199–237. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21146
Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2010). “Doing” science versus “being”
a scientist: Examining 10/11-year-old schoolchildren’s constructions of science through the lens of identity.
Science Education, 94(4), 617–639. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20399
Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2012a). Science aspirations, capital, and
family habitus: How families shape children’s engagement and identifcation with science. American Educa-
tional Research Journal, 49(5), 881–908. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831211433290
Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2012b). “Balancing acts’’: Elementary
school girls’ negotiations of femininity, achievement, and science. Science Education, 96(6), 967–989. https://
doi.org/10.1002/sce.21031
Archer, L., DeWitt, J., & Willis, B. (2014). Adolescent boys’ science aspirations: Masculinity, capital, and power.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21122
Archer, L., Godec, S., Calabrese Barton, A., Dawson, E., Mau, A., & Patel, U. (2021). Changing the feld: A Bour-
dieusian analysis of educational practices that support equitable outcomes among minoritized youth on two
informal science learning programs. Science Education, 105(1), 166–203. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21602
Archer, L., Nomikou, E., Mau, A., King, H., Godec, S., DeWitt, J., & Dawson, E. (2019). Can the subaltern
“speak” science? An intersectional analysis of performances of “talking science through muscular intellect”
by “subaltern” students in UK urban secondary science classrooms. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 14(3),
723–751. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-018-9870-4
Atwater, M. M., Butler, M. B., Freeman, T. B., & Carlton Parsons, E. R. (2013). An examination of Black sci-
ence teacher educators’ experiences with multicultural education, equity, and social justice. Journal of Science
Teacher Education, 24(8), 1293–1313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-013-9358-8
Banks, J. A. (1995). Multicultural education: Historical development, dimensions, and practice. In J. A. Banks &
C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 3–24). Macmillan.
Banks, J. A. (2001). Cultural diversity and education: Foundations, curriculum, and teaching (4th ed.). Allyn and Bacon.
Banks, J. A. (2016). Cultural diversity and education: Foundations, curriculum and teaching (6th ed.). Routledge.
Bianchini, J. A., Dwyer, H. A., Brenner, M. E., & Wearly, A. J. (2015). Facilitating science and mathematics
teachers’ talk about equity: What are the strengths and limitations of four strategies for professional learning?
Science Education, 99(3), 577–610. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21160
Bolshakova, V. L. J., Johnson, C. C., & Czerniak, C. M. (2011). “It depends on what science teacher you
got”: Urban science self-efcacy from teacher and student voices. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6(4),
961–997. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-011-9346-2
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2017). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in America (5th
ed.). Rowman & Littlefeld.
Bonnette, R. N., Crowley, K., & Schunn, C. D. (2019). Falling in love and staying in love with science: Ongo-
ing informal science experiences support fascination for all children. International Journal of Science Education,
41(12), 1626–1643. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1623431
Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1992). An invitation to refexive sociology. University of Chicago Press.
Bravo, M. A., Mosqueda, E., Solís, J. L., & Stoddart, T. (2014). Possibilities and limits of integrating science and
diversity education in preservice elementary teacher preparation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(5),
601–619. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-013-9374-8
Brenner, M. E., Bianchini, J. A., & Dwyer, H. A. (2016). Science and mathematics teachers working toward
equity through teacher research: Tracing changes across their research process and equity views. Journal of
Science Teacher Education, 27(8), 819–845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9490-3
Brkich, K. L. (2014). Urban ffth graders’ connections-making between formal earth science content and
their lived experiences. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 9(1), 141–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11422-013-9505-8
Brotman, J. S., & Mensah, F. M. (2013). Urban high school students’ perspectives about sexual health decision-
making: The role of school culture and identity. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 8(2), 403–431. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11422-012-9451-x
Brown, B. A. (2011). Isn’t that just good teaching? Disaggregate instruction and the language identity dilemma.
Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(8), 679–704. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-011-9256-x
Brown, B. A., Pérez, G., Ribay, K., Boda, P. A., & Wilsey, M. (2021). Teaching culturally relevant science in
virtual reality: “When a problem comes, you can solve it with science”. Journal of Science Teacher Education,
32(1), 7–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2020.1778248
Brown, B. A., Ryoo, K., & Rodriguez, J. (2010). Pathway towards fuency: Using “disaggregate instruc-
tion” to promote science literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 32(11), 1465–1493. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09500690903117921

253
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

Brown, J. C., & Crippen, K. J. (2016). The knowledge and practices of high school science teachers in pursuit
of cultural responsiveness. Science Education, 101(1), 99–133. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21250
Brown, J. C., & Livstrom, I. C. (2020). Secondary science teachers’ pedagogical design capacities for multicul-
tural curriculum design. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 31(8), 821–840. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046
560X.2020.1756588
Burgin, S. R., McConnell, W. J., & Flowers, A. M. (2015). ‘I actually contributed to their research’: The infu-
ence of an abbreviated summer apprenticeship program in science and engineering for diverse high-school
learners. International Journal of Science Education, 37(3), 411–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014
.989292
Calabrese Barton, A., Kang, H., Tan, E., O’Neill, T. B., Bautista-Guerra, J., & Brecklin, C. (2013). Crafting
a future in science: Tracing middle school girls’ identity work over time and space. American Educational
Research Journal, 50(1), 37–75. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831212458142
Calabrese Barton, A., & Tan, E. (2018). A longitudinal study of equity-oriented STEM-rich making among
youth from historically marginalized communities. American Educational Research Journal, 55(4), 761–800.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218758668
Carlone, H. B., Haun-Frank, J., & Webb, A. (2011). Assessing equity beyond knowledge-and skills-based out-
comes: A comparative ethnography of two fourth-grade reform-based science classrooms. Journal of Research
in Science Teaching, 48(5), 459–485. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20413
Carlone, H. B., Johnson, A., & Scott, C. M. (2015). Agency amidst formidable structures: How girls perform
gender in science class. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(4), 474–488. https://doi.org/10.1002/
tea.21224
Carrier, S. J., Thomson, M. M., Tugurian, L. P., & Stevenson, K. T. (2014). Elementary science education in
classrooms and outdoors: Stakeholder views, gender, ethnicity, and testing. International Journal of Science Edu-
cation, 36(13), 2195–2220. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.917342
Chapman, A., & Feldman, A. (2017). Cultivation of science identity through authentic science in an urban
high school classroom. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 12(2), 469–491. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11422-015-9723-3
Chapman, A., Rodriguez, F. D., Pena, C., Hinojosa, E., Morales, L., Del Bosque, V., Tijerina, Y., & Tarawneh,
C. (2019). “Nothing is impossible”: Characteristics of Hispanic females participating in an informal STEM
setting. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 15(3), 723–737. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09947-6
Chappell, M. J., & Varelas, M. (2020). Ethnodance and identity: Black students representing science identities in
the making. Science Education, 104(2), 193–221. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21558
Charity Hudley, A. H., & Mallinson, C. (2017). “It’s worth our time”: A model of culturally and linguistically
supportive professional development for K-12 STEM educators. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 12(3),
637–660. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-016-9743-7
Chen, J. L., & Mensah, F. M. (2018). Teaching contexts that infuence elementary preservice teachers’ teacher
and science teacher identity development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 29(5), 420–439. http://doi.org
/10.1080/1046560X.2018.1469187
Chesnutt, K., Jones, M. G., Hite, R., Cayton, E., Ennes, M., Corin, E. N., & Childers, G. (2018). Next gen-
eration crosscutting themes: Factors that contribute to students’ understandings of size and scale. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 55(6), 876–900. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21443
Clark, S. K., Lott, K., Larese-Casanova, M., Taggart, A. M., & Judd, E. (2020). Leveraging integrated science and
disciplinary literacy instruction to teach frst graders to write like scientists and to explore their perceptions
of scientists. Research in Science Education, 51(4), 1153–1175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09927-9
Collins, P. H. (2016). Intersectionality (Key Concepts) [Kindle Android version].
Cone, N. (2012). The efects of community-based service learning on preservice teachers’ beliefs about the char-
acteristics of efective science teachers of diverse students. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(8), 889–907.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-93050
Cornell, S., & Hartmann, D. (2007). Ethnicity and race: Making identities in a changing world. Pine Forge Press.
Covarrubias, A. (2011). Quantitative intersectionality: A critical race analysis of the Chicana/o educational
pipeline. Journal of Latinos and Education, 10(2), 86–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2011.556519
Crenshaw, K. W. (2016). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women
of color. In E. Taylor, D. Gillborn, & G. Ladson-Billings (Eds.), Foundations of critical race theory in education
(2nd ed., pp. 223–250). Routledge.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.
Sage.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Sage.
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2017). Critical race theory: An introduction (3rd ed.). New York University Press.

254
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

Denerof, V. (2016). Professional development in person: Identity and the construction of teaching within a high
school science department. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(2), 213–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11422-013-9546-z
DeWitt, J., & Archer, L. (2015). Who aspires to a science career? A comparison of survey responses from pri-
mary and secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 37(13), 2170–2192. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1071899
DeWitt, J., Archer, L., & Mau, A. (2016). Dimensions of science capital: Exploring its potential for understand-
ing students’ science participation. International Journal of Science Education, 38(16), 2431–2449. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1248520
DeWitt, J., Archer, L., & Osborne, J. (2013). Nerdy, brainy and normal: Children’s and parents’ constructions
of those who are highly engaged with science. Research in Science Education, 43(4), 1455–1476. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11165-012-9315-0
DeWitt, J., Archer, L., & Osborne, J. (2014). Science-related aspirations across the primary-secondary divide:
Evidence from two surveys in England. International Journal of Science Education, 36(10), 1609–1629. https://
doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.871659
DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Archer, L., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2013). Young children’s aspirations in
science: The unequivocal, the uncertain and the unthinkable. International Journal of Science Education, 35(6),
1037–1063. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.608197
Dickerson, D. L., Eckhof, A., Stewart, C. O., Chappell, S., & Hathcock, S. (2014). The examination of a
pullout STEM program for urban upper elementary students. Research in Science Education, 44(3), 483–506.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-013-9387-5
Dimick, A. S. (2012). Student empowerment in an environmental science classroom: Toward a framework for
social justice science education. Science Education, 96(6), 990–1012. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21035
Dixson, A. D., Rousseau Anderson, C. K., & Donner, J. K. (2016). Critical race theory in education: All God’s
children got a song. Taylor & Francis.
Donovan, B. M. (2014). Playing with fre? The impact of the hidden curriculum in school genetics on essen-
tialist conceptions of race. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(4), 462–496. https://doi.org/10.1002/
tea.21138
Donovan, B. M. (2016). Framing the genetics curriculum for social justice: An experimental exploration of how
the biology curriculum infuences beliefs about racial diference. Science Education, 100(3), 586–616. https://
doi.org/10.1002/sce.21221
Donovan, B. M. (2017). Learned inequality: Racial labels in the biology curriculum can afect the development
of racial prejudice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(3), 379–411. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21370
Donovan, B. M., Semmens, R., Keck, P., Brimhall, E., Busch, K. C., Weindling, M., Duncan, A., Stuhlsatz, M.,
Bracey, Z. B., Bloom, M., Kowalski, S., & Salazar, B. (2019). Toward a more humane genetics education:
Learning about the social and quantitative complexities of human genetic variation research could reduce racial
bias in adolescent and adult populations. Science Education, 103(3), 529–560. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21506
Donovan, B. M., Weindling, M., Salazar, B., Duncan, A., Stuhlsatz, M., & Keck, P. (2021). Genomics lit-
eracy matters: Supporting the development of genomics literacy through genetics education could reduce
the prevalence of genetic essentialism. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58(4), 520–550. https://doi.
org/10.1002/tea.21670
Dorph, R., Bathgate, M. E., Schunn, C. D., & Cannady, M. A. (2018). When I grow up: The relationship
of science learning activation to STEM career preferences. International Journal of Science Education, 40(9),
1034–1057. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1360532
Dupuis, J., & Abrams, E. (2017). Student science achievement and the integration of Indigenous knowl-
edge on standardized tests. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 12(3), 581–604. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11422-016-9728-6
Elmesky, R., & Seiler, G. (2007). Movement expressiveness, solidarity and the (re)shaping of African American
students’ scientifc identities. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 2(1), 73–103. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/
s11422-007-9050-4
Feagin, J. R. (2020). The white racial frame: Centuries of racial framing and counter-framing (3rd ed.). Routledge.
Fenton, S. (2010). Ethnicity (2nd ed.). Polity Press.
Ferguson, S. L., & Lezotte, S. M. (2020). Exploring the state of science stereotypes: Systematic review and
meta-analysis of the Draw-A-Scientist Checklist. School Science and Mathematics, 120(1), 55–65. https://doi.
org/10.1111/ssm.12382
Gallard Martínez, A. J., Pitts, W., Ramos de Robles, S. L., Milton Brkich, K. L., Flores Bustos, B., & Claeys,
L. (2019). Discerning contextual complexities in STEM career pathways: Insights from successful Latinas.
Cultural Studies of Science Education, 14(4), 1079–1103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-018-9900-2

255
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

Gamez, R., & Parker, C. A. (2018). Becoming science learners: A study of newcomers’ identity work in elemen-
tary school science. Science Education, 102(2), 377–413. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21323
Ganchorre, A. R., & Tomanek, D. (2012). Commitment to teach in under-resourced schools: Prospective sci-
ence and mathematics teachers’ dispositions. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(1), 87–110. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10972-011-9263-y
Gomes, M. de F. C., Mortimer, E. F., & Kelly, G. J. (2011). Contrasting stories of inclusion/exclusion in the
chemistry classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 33(6), 747–772. https://doi.org/10.1080/095
00693.2010.506665
Gonzalez-Howard, M., & Suarez, E. (2021). Retiring the term English language learners: Moving toward lin-
guistic justice through asset-oriented framing. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58(5), 749–752. https://
doi.org/10.1002/tea.21684
Greenleaf, C. L., Litman, C., Hanson, T. L., Rosen, R., Boscardin, C. K., Herman, J., Schneider, S. A., Mad-
den, S., & Jones, B. (2011). Integrating literacy and science in biology: Teaching and learning impacts
of reading apprenticeship professional development. American Educational Research Journal, 48(3), 647–717.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831210384839
Grimberg, B. I., & Gummer, E. (2013). Teaching science from cultural points of intersection. Journal of Research
in Science Teaching, 50(1), 12–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21066
Grimes, N. K. (2013). The nanny in the schoolhouse: The role of femme-Caribbean identity in attaining success
in urban science classrooms. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 8(2), 333–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11422-012-9476-1
Habig, B., Gupta, P., Levine, B., & Adams, J. (2020). An informal science education program’s impact on STEM
major and STEM career outcomes. Research in Science Education, 50(3), 1051–1074. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11165-018-9722-y
Harper, S. G. (2017). Engaging Karen refugee students in science learning through a cross-cultural learning
community. International Journal of Science Education, 39(3), 358–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.20
17.1283547
Hernandez, C., & Shroyer, M. G. (2017). The use of culturally responsive teaching strategies among Latina/o
student teaching interns during science and mathematics instruction of CLD students. Journal of Science
Teacher Education, 28(4), 367–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2017.1343605
Holland, D., Lachiotte, W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Harvard Uni-
versity Press.
Howard-Hamilton, M. F. (2003). Theoretical frameworks for African American women. New Directions for Stu-
dent Services, 104, 19–27. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.104
Huerta, M., Lara-Alecio, R., Tong, F., & Irby, B. J. (2014). Developing and validating a science notebook rubric
for ffth-grade non-mainstream students. International Journal of Science Education, 36(11), 1849–1870. https://
doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.879623.
Hughes, R. M., Nzekwe, B., & Molyneaux, K. J. (2013). The single-sex debate for girls in science: A compari-
son between two informal science programs on middle school students’ STEM identity formation. Research
in Science Education, 43(5), 1979–2007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9345-7
Hughes, R. M., Schellinger, J., & Roberts, K. (2021). The role of recognition in disciplinary identity for girls.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58(3), 420–455. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21665
Jackson, J. K., & Ash, G. (2012). Science achievement for all: Improving science performance and closing achieve-
ment gaps. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(7), 723–744. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-011-9238-z
Kane, J. M. (2012). Young African American children constructing academic and disciplinary identities in an
urban science classroom. Science Education, 96(3), 457–487. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20483
Kang, H., Calabrese Barton, A., Tan, E., Simpkins, D., Rhee, H., & Turner, C. (2019). How do middle school
girls of color develop STEM identities? Middle school girls’ participation in science activities and identifca-
tion with STEM careers. Science Education, 103(2), 418–439. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21492
Kang, H., & Zinger, D. (2019). What do core practices ofer in preparing novice science teachers for equitable
instruction? Science Education, 103(4), 823–853. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21507
Kang, R., Skinner, F., & Hyatt, C. (2018). An activity theory analysis of African American students’ experi-
ences in advanced placement science courses. School Science and Mathematics, 118(8), 358–369. https://doi.
org/10.1111/ssm.12305
Kanter, D. E., & Konstantopoulos, S. (2010). The impact of a project-based science curriculum on minority stu-
dent achievement, attitudes, and careers: The efects of teacher content and pedagogical content knowledge
and inquiry-based practices. Science Education, 94(5), 855–887. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20391
King, N. S., & Pringle, R. M. (2019). Black girls speak STEM: Counter stories of informal and formal learn-
ing experiences. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(5), 539–569. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21513

256
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

Kivisto, P., & Croll, P. R. (2012). Race and ethnicity: The basics. Routledge.
Lee, O., Llosa, L., Jiang, F., O’Connor, C., Haas, A. (2016). School resources in teaching science to diverse stu-
dent groups: An intervention’s efect on elementary teachers’ perceptions. Journal of Science Teacher Education,
27(7), 769–794. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9487-y
Liou, P.-Y., Desjardins, C. D., & Lawrenz, F. (2010). Infuence of scholarships on STEM teachers: Clus-
ter analysis and characteristics. School Science and Mathematics, 110(3), 128–143. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1949-8594.2010.00016.x
Liou, P.-Y., & Lawrenz, F. (2011). Optimizing teacher preparation loan forgiveness programs: Variables related to
perceived infuence. Science Education, 95(1), 121–144. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20409
Lofgran, B. B., Smith, L. K., & Whiting, E. F. (2015). Science self-efcacy and school transitions: Elementary
school to middle school, middle school to high school. School Science and Mathematics, 115(7), 366–376.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12139
López, N., Erwin, C., Binder, M., & Chavez, M. J. (2018). Making the invisible visible: Advancing quantita-
tive methods in higher education using critical race theory and intersectionality. Race Ethnicity and Education,
21(2), 180–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2017.1375185
Madkins, T. C., & McKinney de Royston, M. (2019). Illuminating political clarity in culturally relevant science
instruction. Science Education, 103(6), 1319–1346. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21542
Maerten-Rivera, J., Myers, N., Lee, O., & Penfeld, R. (2010). Student and school predictors of high-stakes
assessment in science. Science Education, 94(6), 937–962. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20408
Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2011). Pipeline persistence: Examining the association of educational experi-
ences with earned degrees in STEM among U.S. students. Science Education, 95(5), 877–907. https://doi.
org/10.1002/sce.20441
Marco-Bujosa, L. M., Friedman, A. A., & Kramer, A. (2021). Learning to teach science in urban schools: Con-
text as content. School Science and Mathematics, 121(1), 46–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12441
Marco-Bujosa, L. M., McNeill, K. L., & Friedman, A. A. (2020). Becoming an urban science teacher: How
beginning teachers negotiate contradictory school contexts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(1),
3–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21583
Mark, S. L. (2018). A bit of both science and economics: A non-traditional STEM identity narrative. Cultural
Studies of Science Education, 13(4), 983–1003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-017-9832-2
Mark, S. L., Id-Deen, L., & Thomas, S. (2020). Getting to the root of the matter: Pre-service teachers’ experi-
ences and positionalities with learning to teach in culturally diverse contexts. Cultural Studies of Science Educa-
tion, 15(2), 453–483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09956-5
Matsuda, M. J., Lawrence, C., Delgado, R., & Crenshaw, K. (1993). Words that wound: Critical race theory, assaul-
tive speech, and the frst amendment. Westview.
Matuk, C., Hurwich, T., Spiegel, A., & Diamond, J. (2021). How do teachers use comics to promote engagement,
equity, and diversity in science classrooms? Research in Science Education, 51(3), 685–732. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11165-018-9814-8
Mavuru, L., & Ramnarain, U. D. (2020). Language afordances and pedagogical challenges in multilingual grade
9 natural sciences classrooms in South Africa. International Journal of Science Education, 2472–2492. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1655177
McCollough, C., & Ramirez, O. (2012). Cultivating culture: Preparing future teachers for diversity
through family science learning events. School Science and Mathematics, 112(7), 443–451. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2012.00158.x
McNew-Birren, J., Hildebrand, T., & Belknap, G. (2018). Strange bedfellows in science teacher preparation:
Conficting perspectives on social justice presented in a Teach for America-university partnership. Cultural
Studies of Science Education, 13(2), 437–462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-016-9791-z
Means, B., Wang, H., Wei, X., Lynch, S., Peters, V., Young, V., & Allen, C. (2017). Expanding STEM oppor-
tunities through inclusive STEM-focused high schools. Science Education, 101(5), 681–715. https://doi.
org/10.1002/sce.21281
Mensah, F. M. (2011). The DESTIN: Preservice teachers’ drawings of the ideal elementary science teacher.
School Science and Mathematics, 111(8), 379–388. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00103.x
Mensah, F. M. (2019). Finding voice and passion: Critical race theory methodology in science teacher educa-
tion. American Educational Research Journal, 56(4), 1412–1456. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218818093
Mensah, F. M., Brown, J. C., Titu, P., Rozowa, P., Sivaraj, R., & Heydari, R. (2018). Preservice and inservice
teachers’ ideas of multiculturalism: Explorations across two science methods courses in two diferent contexts.
Journal of Science Teacher Education, 29(2), 12–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2018.1425820
Mensah, F. M., & Jackson, I. (2018). Whiteness as property in science teacher education. Teachers College Record,
120(1), 1–38. www.tcrecord.org ID Number: 21958.

257
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning to think like an adult: Core concepts of transformation theory. In J. Mezirow &
Associates (Eds.), Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress (pp. 3–34). Jossey-Bass.
Morales-Doyle, D. (2017). Justice-centered science pedagogy: A catalyst for academic achievement and social
transformation. Science Education, 101(6), 1034–1060. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21305
Moseley, C., & Taylor, B. (2011). Analysis of environmental and general science teaching efcacy among instruc-
tors with contrasting class ethnicity distributions: A four-dimensional assessment. School Science and Mathemat-
ics, 111(5), 199–208. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00079.x
Mutegi, J. W., Sorge, B., Fore, G. A., & Gibau, G. S. (2019). A tale of two camps: A mixed methods investiga-
tion into racially disparate outcomes in a nanotechnology research experience. Science Education, 103(6),
1456–1477. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21548
Nagel, J. (1994). Constructing ethnicity: Creating and recreating ethnic identity and culture. Social Prob-
lems, 41(1), 152–176. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3096847
Nazar, C. R., Calabrese Barton, A., Morris, C., & Tan, E. (2019). Critically engaging engineering in place
by localizing counternarratives in engineering design. Science Education, 103(3), 638–664. https://doi.
org/10.1002/sce.21500
Nehmeh, G., & Kelly, A. M. (2018). Urban science teachers in isolation: Challenges, resilience, and adaptive
action. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 29(6), 527–549. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2018.1474425
Noble, T., Suarez, C., Rosebery, A., O’Connor, M. C., Warren, B., & Hudicourt-Barnes, J. (2012). “I never
thought of it as freezing”: How students answer questions on large-scale science tests and what they know
about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(6), 778–803. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21026
Okebukola, P. A., Owolabi, O., & Okebukola, F. O. (2013). Mother tongue as default language of instruction in
lower primary science classes: Tension between policy prescription and practice in Nigeria. Journal of Research
in Science Teaching, 50(1), 62–81. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21070
Omi, M., & Winant, H. (1994). Racial formation in the United States: From the 1960s to the 1990s (2nd ed.).
Routledge.
Parker, C. (2014). Multiple infuences: Latinas, middle school science, and school. Cultural Studies of Science
Education, 9(2), 317–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-014-9573-4
Parker, C., Grigg, J., D’Souza, S., Mitchell, C., & Smith, E. (2020). Informed aspirations in science and engi-
neering with upper elementary students after 1 year of a STEM intensive university-school district partner-
ship. School Science and Mathematics, 120(6), 364–374. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12428
Parker, L., & Lynn, M. (2002). What’s race got to do with it? Critical race theory’s conficts with and con-
nections to qualitative research methodology and epistemology. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 7–22. https://doi.
org/10.1177/107780040200800102
Parsons, E. C. (2014). Unpacking and critically synthesizing the literature on race and ethnicity in science edu-
cation. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. 2, pp. 167–186).
Taylor & Francis.
Parsons, E. C., & Bayne, G. U. (2012). Conceptualizations of context in science education research: Implications
for equity. In J. A. Bianchini, V. L. Akerson, A. Calabrese Barton, O. Lee, & A. J. Rodriguez (Eds.), Moving
the equity agenda forward: Equity research, practice, and policy in science education (pp. 153–172). Springer.
Phinney, J. S. (1990). Ethnic identity in adolescents and adults: Review of research. Psychological Bulletin, 108,
499–514. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.499
Pitts, W. (2011). Potentialities beyond defcit perspectives: Globalization, culture and urban science education in
the Bronx. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6(1), 89–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-010-9301-7
Pringle, R. M., Brkich, K. M., Adams, T. L., West-Olatunii, C., & Archer-Banks, D. A. (2012). Factors infu-
encing elementary teachers’ positioning of African American girls as science and mathematics learners. School
Science and Mathematics, 112(4), 217–229. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2012.00137.x
Pruitt, S. L., & Wallace, C. S. (2012). The efect of a state department of education teacher mentor initia-
tive on science achievement. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(4), 367–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10972-012-9280-5
Quinn, D. M., & Cooc, N. (2015). Science achievement gaps by gender and race/ethnicity in elemen-
tary and middle school: Trends and predictors. Educational Researcher, 44(6), 336–346. https://doi.
org/10.3102/0013189X15598539
Quintana, S. M. (1998). Children’s developmental understanding of ethnicity and race. Applied & Preventative
Psychology, 7, 27–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0962-1849(98)80020-6
Ramirez, O., McCollough, C. A., & Diaz, Z. (2016). Creating a model of acceptance: Preservice teachers inter-
act with non-English-speaking Latino parents using culturally relevant mathematics and science activities at
family learning events. School Science and Mathematics, 116(1), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12150
Ramnarain, U. D. (2011). Equity in science at South African schools: A pious platitude or an achievable goal?
International Journal of Science Education, 33(10), 1353–1371. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.510855

258
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

Ramnarain, U. D., & de Beer, J. (2013). Science students creating hybrid spaces when engaging in an expo inves-
tigation project. Research in Science Education, 43(1), 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9246-1
Rawson, C. H., & McCool, M. A. (2014). Just like all the other humans? Analyzing images of scientists in
children’s trade books. School Science and Mathematics, 114(1), 10–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12046
Richardson Bruna, K. (2010). Mexican immigrant transnational social capital and class transformation: Exam-
ining the role of peer mediation in insurgent science. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 5(2), 383–422.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-009-9232-3
Ridgeway, M. L., & Yerrick, R. K. (2018). Whose banner are we waving? Exploring STEM partnerships
for marginalized urban youth. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(1), 59–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11422-016-9773-1
Riegle-Crumb, C., Moore, C., & Ramos-Wada, A. (2011). Who wants to have a career in science or math?
Exploring adolescents’ future aspirations by gender and race/ethnicity. Science Education, 95(3), 458–476.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20431
Rivera Maulucci, M. S. (2010). Navigating role forces and the aesthetic|authentic caring dialectic: A novice
urban science teacher’s developmental trajectory. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 5(3), 625–647. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11422-009-9221-6
Rivera Maulucci, M. S. (2011). Language experience narratives and the role of autobiographical reasoning
in becoming an urban science teacher. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6(2), 413–434. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11422-011-9323-9
Rivera Maulucci, M. S. (2013). Emotions and positional identity in becoming a social justice science teacher:
Nicole’s story. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(4), 453–478. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21081
Rivera Maulucci, M. S., & Mensah, F. M. (2015). Naming ourselves and others. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 52(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21196
Ryu, M. (2013). “But at school . . . I became a bit shy”: Korean immigrant adolescents’ discursive participa-
tion in science classrooms. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 8(3), 649–671. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11422-012-9406-2
Ryu, M. (2015). Understanding Korean transnational girls in high school science classes: Beyond the model
minority stereotype. Science Education, 99(2), 350–377. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21142
Ryu, M. (2019). Mixing languages for science learning and participation: An examination of Korean-English
bilingual learners in an after-school science learning programme. International Journal of Science Education,
41(10), 1303–1323. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1605229
Ryu, M., & Sikorski, T. R. (2019). Tracking a learner’s verbal participation in science over time: Analysis of
talk features within a social context. Science Education, 103(3), 561–589. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21493
Schindel Dimick, A. (2016). Exploring the potential and complexity of a critical pedagogy of place in urban
science education. Science Education, 100(5), 814–836. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21233
Scogin, S. C., Cavlazoglu, B., LeBlanc, J., & Stuessy, C. L. (2018). Inspiring science achievement: A mixed
methods examination of the practices and characteristics of successful science programs in diverse high
schools. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(3), 649–670. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-016-9796-7
Sedawi, W., Ben Zvi Assaraf, O., & Reiss, M. J. (2020). Indigenous children’s connectedness to nature: The
potential infuence of culture, gender and exposure to a contaminated environment. Cultural Studies of Science
Education, 15(4), 955–989. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-020-09982-8
Seiler, G. (2011). Becoming a science teacher: Moving toward creolized science and an ethic of cosmopolitan-
ism. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6(1), 13–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-009-9240-3
Settlage, J. (2011). Counter stories from white mainstream preservice teachers: Resisting the master narrative of def-
icit by default. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6(4), 803–836. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-011-9324-8
Shady, A. (2014). Negotiating cultural diferences in urban science education: An overview of teacher’s frst-
hand experience refection of cogen journey. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 9(1), 31–51. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11422-013-9486-7
Sharma, R. A., & Honan, E. (2020). Fijian pre-service teachers’ ideas about science and scientists. Journal of Sci-
ence Teacher Education, 31(3), 335–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2019.1706904
Shaw, J. M., Lyon, E. G., Stoddart, T., Mosqueda, E., & Menon, P. (2014). Improving science and literacy learn-
ing for English language learners: Evidence from a pre-service teacher preparation intervention. Journal of
Science Teacher Education, 25(5), 621–643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-013-9376-6
Smedley, A., & Smedley, B. D. (2005). Race as biology is fction, racism as a social problem is real: Anthropologi-
cal and historical perspectives on the social construction of race. American Psychologist, 60(1), 16. https://doi.
org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.1.16
Snodgrass Rangel, V., Vaval, L., & Bowers, A. (2020). Investigating underrepresented and frst-generation col-
lege students’ science and math motivational beliefs: A nationally representative study using latent profle
analysis. Science Education, 104(6), 1041–1070. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21593

259
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

Solórzano, D. G., & Huber, L. P. (2020). Racial microaggressions: Using critical race theory to respond to everyday racism.
Teachers College Press.
Solórzano, D. G., Ceja, M., & Yosso, T. (2000). Critical race theory, racial microaggressions, and campus racial
climate: The experiences of African American college students. Journal of Negro Education, 69(1–2), 60–73.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2696265
Solórzano, D. G., Villalpando, O., & Oseguera, L. (2005). Educational inequities and Latina/o undergraduate
students in the United States: A critical race analysis of their educational progress. Journal of Hispanic Higher
Education, 4(3), 272–293. http://doi.org/10.1177/1538192705276550
Solórzano, D. G., & Yosso, T. J. (2002a). A critical race counterstory of race, racism, and afrmative action.
Equity & Excellence in Education, 35(2), 155–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/713845284
Solórzano, D. G., & Yosso, T. J. (2002b). Critical race methodology: Counter-storytelling as an analytical frame-
work for education research. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/107780040200800103
Sondergeld, T. A., Provinzano, K., & Johnson, C. C. (2020). Investigating the impact of an urban community
school efort on middle school STEM-related student outcomes over time through propensity score matched
methods. School Science and Mathematics, 120(2), 90–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12387
Southerland, S., Gallard, A., & Callihan, L. (2011). Examining teachers’ hurdles to “science for all”. International
Journal of Science Education, 33(16), 2183–2213. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.530698
Sparks, D. M. (2018). The process of becoming: Identity development of African American female science and
mathematics preservice teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 29(3), 243–261. https://doi.org/10.108
0/1046560X.2018.1436359
Sparks, D. M., & Pole, K. (2019). “Do we teach subjects or students?” Analyzing science and mathematics
teacher conversations about issues of equity in the classroom. School Science and Mathematics, 119(7), 405–416.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12361
Sprague Martinez, L., Bowers, E., Reich, A. J., Ndulue, U. J., Le, A. A., & Peréa, F. C. (2016). Engaging youth
of color in applied science education and public health promotion. International Journal of Science Education,
38(4), 688–699. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1134850
Stevenson, A. D., Gallard Martínez, A. J., Brkich, K. L., Flores, B. B., Claeys, L., & Pitts, W. (2019). Latinas’
heritage language as a source of resiliency: Impact on academic achievement in STEM felds. Cultural Studies
of Science Education, 14(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-016-9789-6
Subramaniam, K. (2013). Minority preservice teachers’ conceptions of teaching science: Sources of science teach-
ing strategies. Research in Science Education, 43(2), 687–709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9284-3
Sue, D. W., Capodilupo, C. M., Torino, G. C., Bucceri, J. M., Holder, A., Nadal, K. L., & Esquilin, M. (2007).
Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for clinical practice. American Psychologist, 62(4), 271–
286. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.62.4.271
Suriel, R. L., & Atwater, M. M. (2012). From the contribution to the action approach: White teachers’ experi-
ences infuencing the development of multicultural science curricula. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
49(10), 1271–1295. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21057
Swanson, L. H., Bianchini, J. A., & Lee, J. S. (2014). Engaging in argument and communicating information: A
case study of English language learners and their science teacher in an urban high school. Journal of Research
in Science Teaching, 51(1), 31–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21124
Swartz, D. (1997). Culture and power: The sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. University of Chicago Press.
Tan, E., Calabrese Barton, A., Kang, H., & O’Neill, T. (2013). Desiring a career in STEM-related felds: How
middle school girls articulate and negotiate identities-in-practice in science. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 50(10), 1143–1179. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21123
Taylor, J. A., Getty, S. R., Kowalski, S. M., Wilson, C. D., Carlson, J., & Van Scotter, P. (2015). An efcacy trial
of research-based curriculum materials with curriculum-based professional development. American Educa-
tional Research Journal, 52(5), 984–1017. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831215585962
Teo, T. W. (2015). Inside versus outside the science classroom: Examining the positionality of two female science
teachers at the boundaries of science education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 10(2), 381–402. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11422-014-9581-4
Terzian, S. G., & Rury, J. L. (2014). “A highly selected strain of guinea pigs”: The Westinghouse science talent
search and educational meritocracy, 1942–1958. Teachers College Record, 116(5), 1–33.
Titu, P., Ring-Whalen, E. A., Brown, J. C., & Roehrig, G. H. (2018). Exploring changes in science teachers’
attitudes toward culturally diverse students during an equity-focused course. Journal of Science Teacher Educa-
tion, 29(5), 378–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2018.1461006
Tobin, K. (2009). Sociocultural perspectives on science and science education [keynote address]. 8th International Con-
gress on Science Teaching and Learning, Barcelona, Spain.
Tolbert, S., & Knox, C. (2016). “They might know a lot of things that I don’t know”: Investigating diferences
in preservice teachers’ ideas about contextualizing science instruction in multilingual classrooms. International
Journal of Science Education, 38(7), 1133–1149. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1183266

260
 Literature on Race and Ethnicity in Science Education

Tong, F., Irby, B. J., Lara-Alecio, R., Guerrero, C., Fan, Y., & Huerta, M. (2014). A randomized study of a
literacy-integrated science intervention for low-socio-economic status middle school students: Findings from
frst-year implementation. International Journal of Science Education, 36(12), 2083–2109. https://doi.org/10.
1080/09500693.2014.883107
Underwood, J. B., & Mensah, F. M. (2018). An investigation of science teacher educators’ perceptions of cul-
turally relevant pedagogy. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 29(1), 46–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/10465
60X.2017.1423457
Upadhyay, B., Maruyama, G., & Albrecht, N. (2017). Taking an active stance: How urban elementary students
connect sociocultural experiences in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 39(18), 2528–
2547. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1392645
Varelas, M., Kane, J. M., & Wylie, C. D. (2011). Young African American children’s representations of self,
science, and school: Making sense of diference. Science Education, 95(5), 824–851. http://doi.org/10.1002/
sce.20447
Varelas, M., Tucker-Raymond, E., & Richards, K. (2015). A structure-agency perspective on young children’s
engagement in school science: Carlos’s performance and narrative. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
52(4), 516–529. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21211
Vincent-Ruz, P., & Schunn, C. D. (2021). Identity complexes and science identity in early secondary: Mono-
topical or in combination with other topical identities. Research in Science Education, 51(Suppl1), S369–S390.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09882-0
Visintainer, T. (2020). “I think at frst glance people would not expect me to be interested in science”: Exploring
the racialized science experiences of high school students of color. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(3),
393–422. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21597
Wallace, C. S. (2013). Promoting shifts in preservice science teachers’ thinking through teaching and action
research in informal science settings. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(5), 811–832. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10972-013-9337-0
Wallace, T., & Brand, B. R. (2012). Using critical race theory to analyze science teachers’ culturally
responsive practices. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7(2), 341–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11422-012-9380-8
Walls, L. (2016). Awakening a dialogue: A critical race theory analysis of U. S. nature of science research
from 1967 to 2013. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(10), 1546–1570. https://doi.org/10.1002/
tea.21266
Warmington, P. (2009). Taking race out of scare quotes: Race-conscious social analysis in an ostensibly post-
racial world. Race Ethnicity & Education, 12(3), 281–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613320903178253
Wee, B. (2012). A cross-cultural exploration of children’s everyday ideas: Implications for science teaching and
learning. International Journal of Science Education, 34(4), 609–627. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.
579193
Weiland, I. (2015). An exploration of Hispanic mothers’ culturally sustaining experiences at an informal science
center. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(1), 84–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21190
Weis, L., Eisenhart, M., Cipollone, K., Stich, A. E., Nikischer, A. B., Hanson, J., Ohle Leibrandt, S., Allen,
C. D., & Dominguez, R. (2015). In the guise of STEM education reform: Opportunity structures and
outcomes in inclusive STEM-focused high schools. American Educational Research Journal, 52(6), 1024–1059.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831215604045
Wild, A. (2015). Relationships between high school chemistry students’ perceptions of a constructivist learning
environment and their STEM career expectations. International Journal of Science Education, 37(14), 2284–
2305. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1076951
Wing, A. K. (1997). Critical race feminism: A reader. New York University Press.
Wong, B. (2012). Identifying with science: A case study of two 13-year-old “high achieving working class”
British Asian girls. International Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 43–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069
3.2010.551671
Wong, B. (2015). Careers “from” but not “in” science: Why are aspirations to be a scientist challenging for
minority ethnic students? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(7), 979–1002. https://doi.org/10.1002/
tea.21231
Xu, J., Coats, L. T., & Davidson, M. L. (2012). Promoting student interest in science: The perspectives of
exemplary African American teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 49(1), 124–154. https://doi.
org/10.3102/0002831211426200
Yerrick, R., & Johnson, J. (2011). Negotiating white science in rural Black America: A case for navigating the
landscape of teacher knowledge domains. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6(4), 915–939. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11422-011-9350-6
Yoon, J., & Martin, L. A. (2019). Infusing culturally responsive science curriculum into early childhood teacher
preparation. Research in Science Education, 49(3), 697–710. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9647-x

261
 Felicia Moore Mensah and Julie A. Bianchini

You, H. S., Park, S., & Delgado, C. (2021). A closer look at US schools: What characteristics are associated with
scientifc literacy? A multivariate multilevel analysis using PISA 2015. Science Education, 105(2), 406–437.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21609
You, H. S., Park, S., Marshall, J. A., & Delgado, C. (2022). Interdisciplinary science assessment of carbon
cycling: Construct validity evidence based on internal structure. Research in Science Education, 52(2), 473–492.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09943-9
Zamudio, M., Russell, C., Rios, F., & Bridgeman, J. L. (2010). Critical race theory matters: Education and ideology.
Taylor & Francis.
Zapata, M. (2013). Substantiating the need to apply a sociocultural lens to the preparation of teachers in an
efort to achieve science reform. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 8(4), 777–801. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11422-013-9513-8
Zhang, L., & Barnett, M. (2015). How high school students envision their STEM career pathways. Cultural
Studies of Science Education, 10(3), 637–656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-013-9557-9
Zirkel, S., & Pollack, T. M. (2016). “Just let the worst students go”: A critical case analysis of public dis-
course about race, merit, and worth. American Educational Research Journal, 53(6), 1522–1555. https://doi.
org/10.3102/0002831216676568

262

View publication stats