Chapter 10: STEAM Instruction and Social Justice

By Megan Boland and Lauren Wise

In 2002, Mae Jemison, the first African-American woman in space, spoke at a TED conference about her experiences throughout her career and the intersection of the sciences and the arts. As both a scientist and a dancer, Jemison addressed the perception that science and art are distinct from one another. She stated, “The sciences, to me, are manifestations of our attempt to express or share our understanding, our experience, to influence the universe external to ourselves. It doesn’t rely on us as individuals. It’s the universe, as experienced by everyone. The arts manifest our desire, our attempt to share or influence others through experiences that are peculiar to us as individuals,” (2002). Similarly to Jemison’s prescient 2002 TEDTalk, this book also explores how the sciences and the arts are not binaries, at odds with one another; rather, they work alongside one and with one another. 

Jemison’s TEDTalk addressed many of the concerns traditionalists may have with incorporating arts with the sciences. While Jemison stands as an example of how the sciences and the arts can work together, she also stands as an example of a woman of color who broke barriers. Underrepresented groups including women, people of color, and patrons from low socioeconomic backgrounds may encounter a variety of barriers and obstacles in pursuing an interest in STEM career paths. Public libraries, as part of their foundational values and unique space within the field of education, are part of the process of educating and engaging young patrons in various ways—including STEAM. This chapter will explore how public libraries, through STEAM programming and instruction, can help promote and strive for equity, access, and diversity in STEAM—so more people of all genders and races can join Jemison in the stars. 

Setting the Context

Despite decades of effort to increase interest, participation, and attainment in STEM education, certain population groups remain underrepresented in these fields. These inequities are predominantly seen across race/ethnicity and gender. While the “gaps” have narrowed some in recent years with increased involvement in related degrees and occupations, they are still present and still wide. Note that although this book as a whole focuses on STEAM rather than STEM, the vast majority of equity-related research in this area centers on STEM, and especially on science and engineering, so these will comprise the bulk of our discussion below. 

Race/Ethnicity 

According to the National Science Foundation (2020), there are three racial/ethnic groups considered to be underrepresented in Science and Engineering (S&E) relative to their proportions in the U.S. college-age population: Blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians/Alaska Natives. Although together these groups comprise 28% of the national population, they hold only 13% of S&E jobs (NSF, 2020). These same groups are also underrepresented in S&E higher education programs. For example, while Blacks made up 13.2% of the U.S. population in 2017, they made up only 9% of S&E bachelor’s degree recipients that year, and 7.7% of S&E doctoral degree recipients (NSF, 2020). 

In addition to being underrepresented in S&E fields, people in these three groups are also paid less than their white and Asian counterparts. The National Science Foundation (2019) reported that although the overall median S&E salary was $80,000 in 2017, the median salary for American Indian or Alaska Native workers was $67,000, while for Hispanics it was $65,000 and for Blacks it was $56,000. Some of this gap might be explained by the fact that the share of underrepresented minorities in S&E fields has increased in recent years, meaning that people from these groups are likely to have fewer years of experience on average than their white and Asian peers. However, even when controlling for experience, education, and field of employment, “S&E highest degree holders in [underrepresented] racial and ethnic groups working full time earn 10% and 5% less at the bachelor’s and master’s degree levels, respectively” (NSF, 2019, “Salary Differences for Women and Racial and Ethnic Minorities,” para. 3). 

Gender 

While a broad definition of STEM fields that includes healthcare presents a more equitable gender representation, the fields of technology, engineering, and computer science show there is still a severe lack of representation for both women and people of color (Funk & Parker, 2018). Improvements have been made over time, however men still outnumber women among S&E degree holders at all levels. This gap is unevenly spread across S&E domains, with women holding the majority of degrees in some fields, but a small minority in others: 

Since 2000, women’s overall share of S&E bachelor’s degrees has remained at about half, although the trend over time varies across fields. In computer sciences and mathematics and statistics, the number of women earning bachelor’s degrees increased during this interval; the number of men, however, grew at a faster rate than the number of women, resulting in an overall decline in women’s share from 28% to 19% in computer sciences and from 48% to 42% in mathematics and statistics. (NSF, 2020). 

This variation is also pronounced in the workforce, with women occupying more jobs in the life and social sciences and fewer in computer science, engineering, and mathematics. Although the number of women in STEM jobs has risen 40% over the past twenty years, they still only occupy 29% of total STEM jobs in the U.S. (NSF, 2020). As with underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, women are also paid less than their male counterparts in the S&E workforce (NSF, 2019). In 2017, the median overall salary for S&E workers was $80,000, however males earned a median of $90,000 while females earned only $60,000. As discussed in the previous section, the effects of experience and subfield lesen, but do not entirely explain, this gap: 

Controlling for the effects of differences in field of highest degree, degree-granting institution, field of occupation, employment sector, and experience,​ the estimated salary difference between men and women narrows by more than half relative to the total difference in full-time salary. However, after controlling for these effects, a salary differential remains. Women earn 9% less than men among S&E highest degree holders at the bachelor’s or doctoral level and 10% less at the master’s level. (NSF, 2019, “Salary Differences for Women and Racial and Ethnic Minorities,” para. 3)

Socioeconomic Status

The statistics about these underrepresented groups look even more bleak when combined with other demographics, such as socioeconomic status. ACT’s 2017 report STEM Education in the U.S. found that “on average, first-generation college students who are from a racial/ethnic minority group and a low-income family are sixteen times less likely to be ready for credit-bearing STEM coursework in college than the group of students who are not considered underserved” (ACT, 2017, p. 11). Socioeconomic gaps in science achievement appear as early as elementary school (Betancur, Votruba-Drzal, & Schunn, 2018). Longitudinal studies have found that “higher family SES compensates for negative predictors of STEM enrollment, such as gender and race,” while lower family SES strengthens gender and race disadvantages (Niu, 2017, p. 298). 

The Leaky Pipeline

Despite general improvements in STEM achievement across all groups on national tests (NSF, 2020), participation in STEM wanes as students move through the educational pipeline, contributing to the gaps described above in higher educational attainment and employment. The metaphor of an “educational pipeline” is used to represent how a student navigates through preschool, elementary school, middle school, high school, postsecondary and into the workforce. Although many policy initiatives and reform efforts are aimed at creating seamless transitions, these junctures behave like cracks through which students drop out, either voluntarily or because they are forced to. In this way, one may hear the pipeline commonly described as “leaky,” especially when it comes to retention in STEM. Unfortunately, as noted, research has shown that certain populations leak out more than others. The effect of this differential leaking creates the imbalances seen in the STEM fields today.

As we consider equity in STEM, we must also acknowledge the intersectional effects of race, gender, socioeconomic status, and other elements of identity such as sexual orientation or religion. While we have discussed some of these issues individually above, we must remain aware that these identities and systems interact and may compound each other. The best solutions to address the “leaky pipeline” will be intersectional ones that acknowledge this reality (Liu, Brown, & Sabat, 2019). 

Bridging the Gaps: Why is it Important?

One would hope everyone can recognize the importance of closing these gaps from the philosophical and moral perspective of promoting well-being for all. But the narrative surrounding the push for improved STEM and STEAM education appears to be a primarily economical one, as educational attainment is viewed as capital. In general, “high levels of attainment are related to higher incomes for individuals and thus to tax revenues and economic activity” (Ewell et al., n.d., p. 1). The average wage for STEM jobs ($87,570) is nearly double the national average for non-STEM ($45,700); however, 99% of STEM jobs require some type of postsecondary education for entry, compared with 36% of overall employment (Fayer et al., 2017, p. 6 & 13).

The need to improve educational attainment in STEM, specifically, is becoming a priority as demanded by the labor market. Data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics revealed above average growth in STEM occupations between 2009-2015 (10.5% versus 5.2% in non-STEM) and is projected to continue rising (Fayer et al, 2017, p. 7). This growth has garnered attention from the U.S. government not only for boosting the domestic economy and quality of life for citizens, but for maintaining international competitiveness. Comparing student assessment results from 2015 across 71 countries, the U.S. ranks low at 38th in math and 24th in science (DeSilver, 2017). A STEAM literate populace is necessary for regaining a global competitive advantage.

The inequities in STEAM “threaten the nation’s ability to close education and poverty gaps, meet the demands of a technology-driven economy, ensure national security, and maintain preeminence in scientific research and technological innovation” (U.S. Department of Education, 2016, p. i). While there are many national and state efforts to promote STEAM education in schools, there are other players who share the instructional space that are contributing to the cause: public libraries.

Beyond its utility for obtaining a high-paying job, STEAM literacy is also valuable in terms of helping individuals understand and respond to challenges facing themselves, their communities, and the world. Critical scholars of education such as Paolo Friere and Henry Giroux assert that teaching is a “political and moral practice that provides the knowledge, skills, and social relations that enable students to explore the possibilities of what it means to be critical citizens while expanding and deepening their participation in the promise of a substantive democracy” (Giroux, 2010, p. 716). This view is one of the central tenets of “critical pedagogy,” a social justice centered approach to teaching and learning that esteems education not for its value to corporate or governmental entities but instead for its value in awakening the critical consciousness of learners, allowing them to act upon the world in ways that lead toward equity and inclusion. In other words, education is power, and it is our job as educators to make sure that power is being distributed equitably. 

Social Justice in Public Libraries

When discussing STEAM programming in libraries from a social justice perspective, some may at first wonder what role libraries have to play in diminishing this “leaky pipeline” effect. Is it really libraries’ place to actively address and confront the inequity in access for a specific career field? 

Public libraries occupy a unique space within the framework of education and library institutions. Generally speaking, public libraries are open to all community members; one does not have to reside within a certain school district’s boundaries to access the resources and programs a public library has to offer. STEAM instruction in a public library therefore has the potential to reach a wide range of learners—some of whom may not be receiving the same access to resources in their own schools. Public libraries can therefore attempt to help “even the playing field,” so to speak, in regards to access to programs, information, and resources. Furthermore, there are no set instructional standards public librarians must reach with their curriculum. This flexibility allows public librarians to be creative and innovative in developing STEAM programming and instruction that would best serve the needs of their specific community. Patrons at a public library are not being graded for their efforts; they do not have to fear what happens if they get a question wrong or make a mistake. They are free to explore STEAM topics without the pressure of a graded academic environment. 

ALA Core Values & Role of Instruction at Public Libraries

Indeed, addressing inequity in the world and in STEM is not merely a tangentially related topic for public librarians. Rather, public libraries are tasked with helping address inequity in regards to access, diversity, and much more. The American Library Association’s (ALA) core values form the foundation of the library and information science fields. These core values therefore apply not only to school librarians, or academic librarians working at a four-year institution; they also apply to public librarians. The following core values are particularly relevant and applicable when considering social justice in public libraries: 

• Access
• Democracy
• Diversity
• The Public Good
• Social Responsibility

More specific to public library staff working with children and teens, the Association for Library Services to Children (ALSC) emphasizes diversity and inclusion throughout its competencies framework document for librarians serving children in public libraries. For example, under the first competency domain (Commitment to Client Group), ALSC states that a competent librarian: 

• Demonstrates respect for diversity and inclusion of cultural values, and continually develops cultural awareness and understanding of self and others;
• Recognizes racism, ethnocentrism, classism, heterosexism, genderism, ableism, and other systems of discrimination and exclusion in the community and its institutions, including the library, and interrupts them by way of culturally competent services;
• Recognizes the effects of societal factors, new knowledge and tools, income inequality, health and food insecurity, etc., on the needs of children; and
• Cultivates an environment for enjoyable and convenient use of library resources, specifically removing barriers to access presented by socioeconomic circumstances, culture, privilege, language, gender, ability, and other diversities (ALSC, 2015, “Commitment to Client Group”). 

The Young Adult Library Services Association (YALSA) also recommends Core Professional Values that should be incorporated into practice, two of which directly relate to social justice: inclusion and social responsibility (ALA, 2015). These values are meant to inform all of our practice as library staff, meaning that to the extent we offer STEAM resources and programming at all, equity and inclusion concerns should be a core part of those offerings. 

As the research described above discovered, there is still inequity both in the number of underrepresented groups in STEM fields as well as in the treatment of those groups once they reach the workforce. As ALA describes the value of social responsibility, 

The broad social responsibilities of the American Library Association are defined in terms of the contribution that librarianship can make in ameliorating or solving the critical problems of society; support for efforts to help inform and educate the people of the United States on these problems and to encourage them to examine the many views on and the facts regarding each problem. (“Core Values of Librarianship”, 2006)

Therefore, for librarians working in any sector or type of library institution, social justice is not relegated to only one component of their work. Rather, social justice is intricately intertwined with every aspect of this field. As ALA’s core values show, social justice and social responsibility form the foundation of the library science field, and therefore should be reflected and considered in every aspect of the work—including libraries’ promotion of equity and diversity in STEAM programs and STEM fields. 

Potential Barriers

Authors and librarians Cherie P. Pandora and Kathy Fredrick (2017) identified some of the barriers library science professionals must remove in order to help encourage women and people of color to pursue opportunities in STEM. The obstacles they identified included adult perceptions, geography, and vocabulary, and they discussed some of the ways public librarians could help address these barriers. In regards to geography, Pandora and Fredrick recommended librarians utilize Skype and other video-conferencing applications to bring in experts and other scientific role models. Even if you are not near major research hubs, through technology it may still be possible for librarians to help facilitate access to these experts. From a social justice perspective, letting young girls and students of color see people who look like them succeeding and thriving in STEM fields may help them envision themselves that way as well. As for adult perceptions, Pandora and Fredrick acknowledged that parent perceptions may impact students’ access to library STEAM programming. A recommendation could then be to incorporate parents into the STEAM programs aimed at children and make them part of the process and program. If a student’s entire community, including their family, friends, and instructors, believe in their pursuit of a STEM degree/career, that can make a huge difference in diminishing the “leaky pipeline” effect. 

Another challenge that Pandora and Fredrick identified was the vocabulary used to describe STEM programming, which might sometimes be overly technical or dry. Pandora and Fredrick write, “We need to put a positive spin on these courses and make them sound desirable, doable, and intriguing” (Pandora and Fredrick, 2017, p. 45). A public library located in Concord, Massachusetts, was able to present STEAM programming to their patrons that met the above criteria of desirable, doable, and intriguing. 

Conclusion

Mae Jemison is undoubtedly a trailblazer; now, the work to support and promote underrepresented groups in STEAM continues for educators and librarians equally. As discussed throughout this chapter, a social justice lens, while applicable to all of the work public librarians do, is particularly relevant when considering STEAM programming and instruction in public libraries. As STEM continues to be a field and a workforce that faces diversity and representation issues, the work to support greater equity and access is not solely for educators from formal institutions.

Public and youth services librarians can help form a foundational and formative interest in STEAM through innovative, engaging, and fun programming and instruction. Furthermore, youth services librarians have the great opportunity to help inspire self-confidence in their young patrons through these programs. Equal opportunity and access is the goal, and public libraries can play a very important role in facilitating the process of achieving equity, diversity, and representation in STEAM. 

References