Slides presented at ASEE CoNECD 2019. Paper available here: https://www.asee.org/public/conferences/148/papers/24885/view

1. COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
School of Chemical, Biological,
and Environmental Engineering
Exploring Transgender and Gender
Nonconforming Engineering
Undergraduate Experiences through
Autoethnography
Presented by Andrea Haverkamp & Ava Butler
Oregon State University

2. Overview
What this presentation does:
● Details the experiences of two trans
undergraduate engineering students at
Oregon State University.
● Connects these experiences to cultural
elements in engineering and higher ed.
● Demonstrates collaborative
autoethnography as a research method.
● Provides citations which mirror the paper.
What this presentation does not do:
● Define “Universal Narratives” which are
true for all trans & gender nonconforming
undergraduate students.
● Provide a Trans 101 education.
● Create a “How To” or “Best Practices” list.

3. Background

4. Background
● 2018 STEM Inclusion Study reported LGBTQ+ students perceiving a chilly,
discriminatory climate [1].
● Students marginalized by gender & sexuality experience diminished sense of
belonging, lower trust in their department, and greater disidentification with
their program. Belonging and positive identification is a critical component to
persistence in engineering education [2-9].
● Engineering as a profession and culture is dominated by gender, e.g. men and
masculinity, necessitating investigation into gender dynamics which has left
nuance of TGNC identities and experiences of gender out of study focuses.

5. Background
● TGNC is acronym for “Transgender & Gender Nonconforming.”
● Unique experiences of TGNC individuals surrounding gender:
○ TGNC individuals can experience discrimination and marginalization by cisgender and gender
conforming LGB individuals in their communities, complicating universal LGBTQ+ narratives [11]
○ TGNC individuals consist of a smaller percent of overall LGBTQ+ community than their
cisgender and gender conforming peers [10]
○ TGNC-specific discrimination, stereotypes, misconceptions exist [10-13]

6. Background
● 2015 U.S. National Transgender Survey - over 30,000 responses [14]
○ 24% of people perceived as transgender on campuses verbally, physically, sexually assaulted
○ 16% left higher education due to harassment they experienced
○ Experiences differed on racial lines, white individuals experienced less campus discrimination
● “Gender Bashing” [10-13]
○ Harassment directed towards TGNC individuals, targeting expressions and presentations that
differ from societally dominant norms expected of their bodies
○ Subtle or overt messages that reinforce rigidity of gender for all individuals

7. Study Prompt
● GIVEN current literature on gender in engineering, LGBTQ+ students in
engineering, trans students on college campuses;
● AIM to uncover TGNC experiences in undergraduate engineering education
with particular focus on resilience, support, and success strategies;
● HOW could we begin to research this specific topic?

8. We used collaborative
autoethnography and
as research method

9. Research Method Overview
● Qualitative research with primary objective of revealing specific experiences
of TGNC students in engineering undergraduate education
● Two undergraduate engineering students were prompted to write
autoethnographies of their experiences as the primary data
● Thematically coded in two phases collaboratively with primary researcher
● Resiliency framework used as lens of data analysis to target systems of
support and community

10. Autoethnography as Method
● Social & Cultural analysis performed through personal narrative [27]
● Self-written detailed writings that are “reflected upon, analyzed, and
interpreted within their broader sociological context” - Chang [28]
● Small sample sizes are typical to preserve salience of individual stories and
targeted reflection - analyzing narratives can uncover gendered landscapes in
engineering institutions [35, 36].
● “We can understand institutions, and thus develop theories about the ways in
which they are gendered and raced, only through the lived experiences of
individuals within those institutions” - Pawley [36]

11. Collaborative Autoethnography
● Multiple autoethnographies from individuals of similar social locations and
social experiences [30]
● Synthesizes common shared experiences together while allowing for diversity
of experience
● Collaborative nature assists interpretation for cultural and social meaning
○ Examples include higher education studies into female psychology student leaders, drug abuse
counselors, foreign-born faculty of color, black trans/nonbinary college students [20, 30-32]

12. Feminist & Critical Methods
● Situate the autoethnography within inherently political social landscape
● Individual knowledge “emerges from political understandings of one’s social
positioning as well as experiences of the cultural freedoms and constraints one
encounters” - Ettorre [32]
● Implicates social systems (e.g. gender) in the autoethnography interpretation,
thus providing insight into dominant social power structures [31, 34]
● Acknowledges confluence of identities upon lived experience [27, 33]

13. Resiliency and Social Support
● Resiliency: the processes used to overcome challenging situations and adapt
to the demands of life, particular attention on unique strategies employed by
marginalized groups [16, 17]
● Research centering resiliency seeks to shift discussion and analysis from
negative experiences or “deficits” and into the community-specific behaviors
which foster success
● Suggests moving beyond enrollment retention or grades as metric of success
[13, 18]

14. Resiliency and Social Support
● Resilience is “reflected by achievement in career development, happiness,
relationships, and physical well-being in the presence of risk factors” - Stieglitz
● Complex and creative strategies that trans & gender nonconforming students
make on a daily basis across every facet of their lives in order to succeed on
campus [13, 18]
● Examples include “Kinship Networks” as described by Z Nicolazzo for trans
undergraduate students, and by Maria Ong for women of color in STEM [20, 21]
○ Refuge from dominant cultural reality & microaggressions
○ Spaces of affirmation and recognition of identity

15. Resiliency and Social Support
● Supportive social spaces & networks for underrepresented groups are often
informal due to lack of institutional support, yet maintain positive learning
climate and validation of common experiences [6, 13, 23, 25].
● TGNC college students are 13% more likely to spend time with others socially,
underscoring importance of community [26].
● Informal networks, such as those described by Maria Ong, also includes
conceptual and ideological spaces in addition to physical spaces [23].

16. Method

17. Participants & Institution
● Naya Pelzl
○ 3rd year student in Computer Science
○ White, Woman, Trans-identified
● Ava Butler
○ 2nd year student in Mechanical Engineering
○ White, Woman, Trans-identified
● Oregon State University
○ Large Public Research University in Pacific Northwest
○ 7,748 total undergraduates enrolled in the College of Engineering Fall 2018

18. Autoethnographic Process
1. Student autoethnographers were given excerpts from the books
“Autoethnography as Method” by Heewon Chang and “Critical
Autoethnography: Intersecting Cultural Identities in Everyday Life” edited by
Robin Boylorn and Mark Orbe and 5 articles which were examples of
autoethnographic research
2. Materials were read, reviewed, and discussed with researchers to ensure
understanding of autoethnographic method

19. Autoethnographic Process
3. Began with central topic or theme of exploration: experiences in engineering
education as it related to social support inside and outside campus
environment.
4. Writing took place over the course of 13 weeks. During week 7, drafts were
reviewed with researchers to explore emerging themes, notable events.
Results of this first phase informed future writing focus and areas to provide
further data and documentation.

20. Autoethnographic Process
5. Final data set comprised of 9 pages of text by Ava Butler and 10 pages of text
by Naya Pelzl.
6. Autoethnographers and researchers collaborated in final analysis through
thematic coding in ATLAS.ti. Together, we clarified concepts and meanings of
quotations in order for experiences to be accurately interpreted and portrayed.
Excerpts were coded by cultural and experiential themes. Throughout analysis,
memos and notes of verbal conversations were kept to ensure validity.

21. Themes

22. Results & Discussion
Three common themes of experience were identified:
● Engineering and trans culture as separate from each other
● Online and virtual spaces as important communities of support and knowledge
● Support systems existing primarily outside of engineering contexts
An additional narrative theme from Naya Pelzl was worth exploring on its own:
● Pursuing greater quality of life by removing engineering component

23. #1 - Engineering &
Trans Culture as
Separate

24. Engineering & Trans Culture
● Both students described an engineering culture geared towards a dominant
paradigm of men (e.g. straight, cisgender, hegemonic masculinity)
● Perceived this dynamic prior to entering undergraduate education through
high school activities
● Positive experiences in engineering anchored by close relationships with other
LGBTQ+ peers and a passion for the subject matter

25. Engineering & Trans Culture
“Most of my classmates & group members seemed perplexed by my gender
identity, and talking about it seemed to make them uncomfortable. Luckily, most of
them treated me with some degree of respect. Several refused to use my
pronouns, and made jokes about my identity. This didn’t bother me a whole lot,
since I had dealt with a lot worse through high school. However, it did make group
projects exceptionally awkward. I felt as though I was always an outsider within the
group, and that the other participants were only there because they had to be.”
(Ava, Document 1, paragraph 30)

26. Engineering & Trans Culture
Differing degrees of “outness” between the two cultures for Naya and peer.
“We would later learn that Suzu is nonbinary and prefers “they/them” pronouns.
Despite this, they lived their life closeted to avoid unnecessary trouble within the
culture of engineering. They truly did love the field, taking part in extracurricular
activities related to engineering in addition to their studies. In order to reconcile
their non-normative gender with the very normative atmosphere of their chosen
field, they elected to remain private with it, (presenting daily) as a woman ... this
itself can lead to harassment, but they elected to take that over what they would be
otherwise subjected to.”
(Naya, Document 6, paragraph 3)

27. Engineering & Trans Culture
● Both autoethnographies noted the inherently political ties the transgender
community has to the broader social landscape
Literature:
● TGNC identity and existence framed within political rhetoric and advocacy:
○ TGNC students in higher education more likely to discuss politics than average student [26]
○ Transgender students claim liberal or far left political identity more often (70%) when compared
to national student average (34%)
● Engineering culture and identity as detached from politics:
○ Depoliticized, meritocratic culture disengaged from social concerns [48]
○ Women’s gender marginalization as not tied within greater political or social structures [38]
○ Engineering as one of the most politically conservative disciplines in higher education [49, 50]

28. #2 - Internet & Virtual
Spaces

29. Internet & Virtual Spaces
● Both autoethnographies noted the internet and virtual spaces as places for
both learning about trans identity, trans culture, and trans community, but also
learning the culture surrounding engineering and STEM
● Naya wrote at length about how she found as early as high school an online
culture of “science and facts” in STEM-related discussions as purporting social
systems of misogyny and transphobia, on sites such as Reddit.com. These
online individuals who connected their identity and ideology to STEM used
“science and fact” language to invalidate “nonnormative sexualities and
genders”

30. Internet & Virtual Spaces
“I saw engineering as the home of these concepts, so when I encountered the
same terms being associated with the far right ... I began to associate the two.
This was reinforced when I found that many of the people attached to that
ideology were themselves engineers. My definition of engineering had now
grown to include a mindset and [far right] ideology.”
(Naya, Document 3, Paragraph 6)

31. Internet & Virtual Spaces
● Carrying into college, these online depictions of engineering and STEM
students carried into her real world assumptions of what sentiments her peers
may carry, creating an internal “barrier” between her outness in engineering
contexts
● Naya noted online spaces of trans affirmation and trans support being
interconnected to online social spheres of social justice - connecting through
online humor, political discussions, and cultivating self-understanding of her
trans identity. She still carries online group-chats with TGNC adults she met
online, which served as an informal social support space outside the institution

32. Internet & Virtual Spaces
● Online spaces which centered on Ava’s political identity and gender identity
became ways to feel included and validated when these were not present in
engineering contexts. Her day-to-day interactions during the first term of her
1st year were dominated by cisgender students on campus and in engineering
classrooms leaving the internet as an important social support space.
“The cruelty of my peers caused me to become deeply and painfully
introverted. I shrunk away from any sort of social obligation, and became a
denizen of the internet. I spent most of my free time locked away in my room,
reading or cruising online forums.”
(Ava, Document 1, paragraph 15)

33. Internet & Virtual Spaces
● The internet offers space for the LGBTQ+ community, and in particular the
TGNC community, to construct affirming spaces for their identity where they
may not exist in person [13, 52]
● Trans college students spend 12% more time online compared to national
student average [26]
● Simultaneously, online spaces surrounding science, engineering, and
technology are male-dominated spaces which are found to proliferate sexist
sentiments towards women & discrimination towards LGBTQ+ people [53]

34. #3 - Support Outside of
Class

35. Support Outside of Class
● The communities which sustain and foster day to day life for the two students
are predominantly outside of engineering contexts
● At the start of college while feeling isolated from engineering peers, Ava
began to search outside of her program for alternate social spaces:
“I joined a bunch of clubs in the first week, and continued going to them throughout
the year. I also started going to local punk shows, and hosting a show on the
college’s radio station.”
(Ava, Document 1, paragraph 31)

36. Support Outside of Class
● Friends in the trans / punk / political community gave peers who “spoke the
same cultural language”
● Studies find LGBTQ+ STEM students being involved in advocacy or political
groups on and off campus as ways to foster supportive community [54]
● Naya similarly became involved in the on-campus LGBTQ+ Pride Center during
her first year, encountering people who are “not cis for the first time”

37. Support Outside of Class
● Naya found specific community who was supportive and accommodating of
her hearing disability as well as aware and affirming of her trans identity
● Both participants noted that their social support networks were
heterogeneous, consisting of cis and trans folk, students and non-students, but
overall lacking peers from engineering programs
● Supportive community had “never really been within engineering” for Naya

38. “Retreat as Resilience” -
Naya’s Strategy

39. Naya’s Story
● There is an additional resiliency strategy salient in Naya’s autoethnography
that the researchers found important to communicate
● There was a consistent narrative theme present in Naya’s autoethnography of
wrestling with the decision to stay or leave engineering
● In the case of Naya, finding success, happiness, and affirmation as a
transgender individual eventually lead her to leave her undergraduate
engineering program

40. Naya’s Story
“The fact of the matter is that I was not willing to live another year closeted but I
didn’t have the ability to live as a woman yet. This meant that I would have to come
out to my project group without actually living it. Given what I’ve already seen of the
culture of the students in the college of engineering, I was legitimately concerned
that I would be able to complete capstone without making enemies of my own
group. I was scared. I was feeling physically ill at the thought of taking capstone.”
(Naya, Document 4, paragraph 9)

41. Naya’s Story
● Naya wrote that her experiences both online and in-person with engineering
culture lead her to perceive that coming out as trans would be met with
negativity or discrimination by her peers.
● It was weighing on her “ability to accomplish work and succeed.”
● She eventually took a term off from her computer science program. The
autoethnography described near universal positive impacts of this decision
upon happiness, self-efficacy, and comfort with identity

42. Naya’s Story
“In short, (retreat as resilience) means the use of accepting failure in one aspect of
life in order to facilitate success in the rest of life. Had I remained headstrong and
continued pursuing my engineering degree in spite of my misgivings and anxieties,
I would have inevitably pushed myself to some kind of breaking point. By
accepting that I needed to remove myself from engineering, I was able to foster
a life which is much more conducive to my success in the rest of my life. I had
been convinced that in order to remain resilient, I needed to power through my
distress and complete my computer science degree. I had compartmentalized my
life and was unable to see the bigger picture.”
(Naya, Document 4, paragraph 6)

43. Naya’s Story
● Naya notes “a phenomenon of so many trans people dropping out of
engineering in favor of something in liberal arts or social sciences.”
● Research demonstrates that humanities and liberal arts are “disciplinary micro-
climates” in higher education which are more inclusive to LGBTQ+ students
than STEM [54]
● For a student in Nicolazzo’s research [18], leaving a women’s studies classroom
or leaving the LGBTQ+ campus center made them feel out of place. The
student in their paper ended up changing major due to her previous major not
having “figurative or literal” space for trans students to be themselves.

44. Takeaways

45. Takeaways
● Underrepresented students such as women of color and LGBTQ+ students in
STEM often keep two separate worlds – STEM peers and those with whom
they socialize and create support networks [15, 21, 57]. This may be particularly
true for TGNC undergraduate engineering students.
● To nurture and maintain TGNC students we may wish to explore the liminal
spaces (physical, cultural, ideological) which have been identified.
● We believe these narratives provide unique insight into how belonging,
support, and inclusion relate to the gender in engineering education.

46. Acknowledgements
Authors on Paper not present:
Naya Selene Pelzl
Dr. Michelle Bothwell
Dr. Devlin Montfort
Dr. Qwo-Li Driskill
National Science Foundation
We acknowledge the support provided by
the National Science Foundation through
grant EEC- 1764103. Any opinions, findings,
and conclusions or recommendations
expressed in this material are those of the
authors and do not necessarily reflect the
views of the National Science Foundation.