# Towards Confidence-aware Calibrated Recommendation

Mohammadmehdi Naghiaei  University of Southern CaliforniaCaliforniaUSA
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>,  Hossein A. Rahmani  University College LondonLondonUK
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>,  Mohammad Aliannejadi  University of
AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and  Nasim Sonboli
Tufts UniversityMedford, MAUSA<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(2022)

###### Abstract.

Recommender systems utilize users’ historical data to learn and predict their
future interests, providing them with suggestions tailored to their tastes.
Calibration ensures that the distribution of recommended item categories is
consistent with the user’s historical data. Mitigating miscalibration brings
various benefits to a recommender system. For example, it becomes less likely
that a system overlooks categories with less interaction on a user’s profile
by only recommending popular categories. Despite notable success, calibration
methods have several drawbacks, such as limiting the diversity of the
recommended items and not considering the calibration confidence. This work,
presents a set of properties that address various aspects of a desired
calibrated recommender system. Considering these properties, we propose a
confidence-aware optimization-based re-ranking algorithm to find the balance
between calibration, relevance, and item diversity, while simultaneously
accounting for calibration confidence based on user profile size. Our model
outperforms state-of-the-art calibration methods in terms of various accuracy
and beyond-accuracy metrics for different user groups.

Calibration, Recommender Systems, Confidence, Re-ranking

††journalyear: 2022††copyright: acmcopyright††conference: Proceedings of the
31st ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management;
October 17–21, 2022; Atlanta, GA, USA††booktitle: Proceedings of the 31st ACM
International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM ’22),
October 17–21, 2022, Atlanta, GA, USA††price: 15.00††doi:
10.1145/3511808.3557713††isbn: 978-1-4503-9236-5/22/10††ccs: Information
systems Information retrieval††ccs: Information systems Recommender systems

###### Acknowledgements.

Author Sonboli’s effort was supported by the CRA CIFellows program funded by
the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 2127309.


# Undergraduate physics students’ experiences: Exploring the impact of
underrepresented identities and intersectionality

D. K. Keblbeck  Department of Physics, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO
80401, USA  K. Piatek-Jimenez  Department of Mathematics, Central Michigan
University, Mount Pleasant, MI 48859, USA  C. Medina Medina  Dematic, KION
Group, Holland, Michigan 49423, USA

(August 28, 2024)

###### Abstract

Historically, physics has been a predominantly male field, with previous
literature showing that there is little diversity amongst U.S. physics
students at the undergraduate and graduate levels, or amongst physicists
within the work force. Recent research indicates that the lack of diversity in
physics is partially due to an unwelcoming climate within physics departments,
as well as differential experiences during college. Most physics education
research that addresses the lack of underrepresented identities within the
field has focused on the identities of women and people of color. There has
been little research to investigate people with multiple underrepresented
identities, including those such as socioeconomic status, first-generation
college students, or learning disabilities. Furthermore, there has been even
less research conducted to better understand the impacts of the intersection
of these underrepresented identities and how it relates to experiences when
pursuing a physics major. In order to address this gap in the literature, our
research project has investigated undergraduate physics students’ experiences,
to better understand what factors affect their experiences and how these may
differ by the intersection of one’s underrepresented identities. In
particular, we explored how these identities impact their experiences as a
physics major. To achieve this goal, we conducted a series of in-depth
interviews with physics majors at one university to learn more about their
college experiences regarding physics. Our findings suggest that there is a
disproportionate number of obstacles when pursuing a physics major faced by
those with a greater number of underrepresented identities. We conclude that
there is a need for more equitable pedagogical practices and departmental
policies within the undergraduate physics experience, in addition to a more
“human” approach to mentorship, in order to foster an environment in which
students with underrepresented identities can feel supported and thrive
academically and professionally.

##  I Introduction and Background

Women and people of color have been historically underrepresented in the
fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). For
instance, in 2020 only 38$\%$ of bachelor’s degrees earned in STEM in the
United States were awarded to women and in the same year only 26$\%$ of these
degrees were awarded to people of color aps (2020a); nsf (2020).

This underrepresentation of women and certain racial groups in the United
States is even more bleak in the subfield of physics, with only 25$\%$ of
women and 16$\%$ of students of color being awarded a physics bachelor’s
degree in 2020 aps (2020b). The literature suggests many reasons that
contribute to this underrepresentation. In particular, one contributing factor
appears to be the culture within certain STEM disciplines, including physics.
In these traditionally male-dominated fields, for instance, women often face
cultural beliefs that men are better at, or more suited for, these disciplines
Cech and Waidzunas (2011). Moreover, previous research suggests that members
of marginalized groups who experience unwelcoming college cultures tend to
experience social and academic withdrawal and isolation Yosso  _et al._
(2009); S  _et al._ (1998); A and F (2006); TL (2010). Within the field of
physics specifically, previous research has documented a cold and discouraging
climate within physics departments towards women and members of certain racial
groups Barthelemy  _et al._ (2016); Doucette and Singh (2020); Abdurrahman and
Olmstead (2021). Prior research indicates this can be a result of an
unawareness within the culture of physics toward the differential experiences
that members of marginalized groups face Santana and Singh (2021), leading to
inequitable treatment. Some college students have reported experiencing a
culture of arrogance around being a physicist, which has been attributed to
why some women leave their physics major Bremer and Hughes (2017). Another
study reported female undergraduate physics majors experiencing an unpleasant
and exclusionary culture created by their male peers and instructors, creating
feelings of isolation Santana and Singh (2023).

Another suggested factor in the lower selection and retention rates of people
with underrepresented identities in physics is the lack of support they
receive to develop their physics identity Hazari  _et al._ (2010), or how they
view themselves as a physics person. One research study indicated that the
compounding effects of systemic inequity faced by people with intersecting
minoritized identities relating to race/ethnicity, gender, and/or sexuality
can hinder the development of a physics identity and lead to a decline in
academic performance in physics Quichocho  _et al._ (2020). Additionally, not
feeling recognized as a physics person by professors and teaching assistants
has been shown to have a negative impact on female students’ grades Cwik and
Singh (2022). Given that recognition by others has been shown to greatly
impact women of color’s science identities Carlone and Johnson (2007), this
lack of recognition by professors and teaching assistants likely impacts their
physics identities as well.

A recent research team has begun to investigate women of color and LGBTQ+
(lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer) women in physics and how the
intersection of these social identities affects their collegiate experiences
Quichocho  _et al._ (2020, 2019); Schipull  _et al._ (2019). These works focus
primarily on investigating physics identity and have found that some students
may fragment or integrate certain parts of their identities into different
physics settings, in order to avoid negative outcomes or to be able to
interact with certain peers. Furthermore, these findings suggest that being
able to reconstruct the stereotype of who does physics to align with their own
identities, while also having strong academic and community supports within
their physics departments significantly improves the development of a physics
identity.

Another recent study conducted an analysis of the experiences of professionals
in STEM fields (including physics) utilizing the intersection of gender, race,
sexuality, and disability status, making a total of 32 different
intersectional groups. This work found that those in the category of white,
able-bodied, heterosexual men did experience intersectional privilege
providing them with more social inclusion, professional respect, and career
opportunities than individuals in the other intersectional categories Cech
(2022).

While much work has been conducted over the decades to better understand and
improve gender and racial disparities within physics, the majority of the
research thus far has focused specifically on women or people of color.
Although more recent research has begun investigating the intersection of
gender and racial identities and has also begun including sexuality and/or
disability as an underrepresented identity, such studies are rare.
Furthermore, there have been no research studies that we could find with
physics students that also include traditionally excluded identities (such as
international student status, low socioeconomic status, or first-generation
college student status) or that explored how the intersection of those
identities with other identities affects their experiences. Understanding how
having multiple marginalized identities affects students’ experiences in
physics is crucial in determining what compounding inequities may arise and in
developing a proper course of action to address these issues. Our work
detailed in this paper aimed to address this gap in the literature by
exploring the challenges of students pursuing an undergraduate physics major,
and the impact the intersection of multiple underrepresented identities had on
their experiences. Our research questions for this study were:

  1. 1.

What challenges do undergraduate students face when pursuing a degree in
Physics/Astronomy?

  2. 2.

Which of these challenges are unique to, or compounded for, individuals with
underrepresented identities?

  3. 3.

How are these challenges experienced by individuals with specific
underrepresented identities or who live at the intersection of multiple
underrepresented identities?

We would like to note that when we utilize the term intersectionality in our
work, we are referring to a framework by which one views the human experience
through the lens of an interconnected system of social categories to which one
belongs Shields (2008); ros (2016). Although the term was originally coined by
Kimberlé Crenshaw Crenshaw (1989) to better explain the experiences of Black
women in the United States, the concept of intersectionality has since been
expanded to explore the intersection of a multitude of social identities on
one’s lived experiences. In our work, we utilize the lens of intersectionality
to understand and interpret the experiences of our participants.

Furthermore, when we use the term underrepresented identities in our work, we
are acknowledging not only the historical numerical underrepresentation within
the field of physics of individuals with such identities but also the power
differentials that exist. These power differentials marginalize the
experiences of individuals who claim membership to these underrepresented
identities.

##  II Method

###  II.1 Context of the study

The data for this study were collected at a large public university within the
United States. The Physics Department at this institution offers both
undergraduate and graduate degrees, including a doctoral degree in physics.
Students earning an undergraduate degree from this department are able to
choose to either earn a major in physics or a major in physics with a
concentration in astronomy.

At the time of the study, the Physics Department at this university had 13
faculty, 12 who present as men and 1 who presents as a woman. Approximately
three-quarters of the faculty in the Physics Department are international
faculty, all of whom are originally from European, North American, or South
American countries.

###  II.2 Data collection

The participants for this study were undergraduate students enrolled as
physics majors at this university. To recruit participants for this study, the
researchers obtained a list from the university of all 30 undergraduate
students who were declared physics majors at the institution at the time of
the study. Based on this list, of the 30 undergraduate majors within the
department, 9 were labeled as female in the university’s computer system and
the remaining 21 were labeled as male111Note, we recognize that the sex of
individuals provided by the computer system is problematic given that it only
considers sex in the binary and likely is providing an individual’s sex
assigned at birth. Therefore, this information may not be accurate to the
actual demographics of the undergraduate students within the department.. Four
of the undergraduate majors were labeled as a racial/ethnic minority in the
computer system; the remaining 26 were labeled as white. In particular, 18 of
the 30 majors were labeled as white males.

In order to ensure a diverse group of participants for this study, an email
invitation was sent to all 12 physics majors labeled in the university’s
system as either ”female” or a racial minority. The researchers also randomly
selected a subset of physics majors who were labeled as white males in the
university’s system and sent them an email inviting them to participate in the
study as well. In the end, 11 students chose to participate.

For this study, the researchers used a phenomenological case study approach.
Through this genre of qualitative research, scholars generally conduct in-
depth, iterative interviews using primarily open- ended questions to seek to
understand the lived experiences of members of a specific group who have
undergone a similar phenomenon Rossman and Rallis (2016); Seidman (2013). The
similar phenomenon that the participants in this study were experiencing was
that of a physics major at this institution. The data for this study were
collected through a series of two in-depth individual interviews with each
participant. The data collected during the first interview focused on the
students’ pre-college science experiences and how they came to become a
physics major. The data collected during the second interview focused on the
details of their experience as physics students throughout their college
careers. The length of the interviews ranged from 26 minutes to 115 minutes
each, with the typical interview lasting approximately 80 minutes. Each
interview was audio recorded and transcribed. All participants were given a
pseudonym and all identifying information was redacted from the interview
transcripts prior to analysis.

In addition to the interviews, participants were asked to complete an online
demographic survey sup . Each participant was sent a link to the survey prior
to participating in the first interview. This survey was comprehensive and was
used to obtain information about the participants’ self-identified
underrepresented identities. The underrepresented identity categories that we
collected data on were: race/ethnicity, gender, sexuality, international
student status, first-generation college student status, and socio-economic
status. During the interviews, two of our participants also shared with us
that they had a learning and/or physical disability that affected their
experiences as well, and therefore we included those as part of their
underrepresented identities in our analysis. We acknowledge that there may be
more of our participants who have a learning and/or physical disability,
however if that is the case, they did not express it as affecting their
experiences as a physics major.

Of the 11 participants in our study, four identify as women, five identify as
men, and two identify as non-binary. Four of the participants identify as a
racial/ethnic minority. Additionally, other underrepresented identities of our
participants (and the frequency of occurrence) include: international student
status (1), an underrepresented sexual orientation (4), first-generation
college student (5), low socioeconomic status (3), physical disability (1),
and learning disability (2). All of the participants were between the ages of
18 and 22.

Of our 11 total participants, any single participant identifies with between 0
to 5 underrepresented identities (URI’s). In total, we had one participant who
identifies with 5 URI’s, two participants who identify with 4 URI’s, two
participants who identify with 3 URI’s, three participants who identify with 2
URI’s, one participant who identifies with 1 URI, and two participants who
identify with 0 URI’s. This information is summarized in Table 1.

Number of URI’s | Number of Participants
---|---
5 | 1
4 | 2
3 | 2
2 | 3
1 | 1
0 | 2
Table 1: Number of URI’s with the corresponding number of participants.

###  II.3 Data analysis

The research team, consisting of the three authors of this manuscript,
analyzed the anonymized transcripts. Initial codes were developed inductively
by the researchers based on themes we identified within the transcripts Corbin
and Strauss (2015). Each interview was then individually coded by at least two
of the three researchers on the project. It was agreed that the size of the
unit for analysis would be a meaning unit; thus, it could range in length from
a few words to a few sentences, as long as the data chunk had a consistent
meaning Campbell  _et al._ (2013). Throughout the process, all three
researchers would meet regularly to discuss the coding together and reconcile
any disagreements within the coding process. During these meetings, we
introduced new codes to the codebook as necessary. Once all transcripts were
coded, two of the researchers re-coded all of the interview transcripts with
the additional codes and reconciled any differences. Finally, once the coding
process was completed, all three researchers examined the data instances for
each code, identifying themes that address our research questions.

As is the case with all social science research, it is important to
acknowledge the bias that may exist within the research process. We
acknowledge that we approached this work with a variety of positionalities.
One of the members of the research team identifies as a white man and has four
underrepresented identities (based on the identity categories that we included
in this work). Another member of the research team identifies as a Latina
woman and has five underrepresented identities. The final member of the team
identifies as a Hispanic woman and has three underrepresented identities.
Within the identity categories that we included in this work, at least one of
us identifies as a member of an underrepresented group in each category
(gender, race/ethnicity, sexuality, international status, first generation
college student, low socioeconomic status, and disability). We believe that
our varied identities and lived experiences were a strength of this research
team and allowed for a deeper understanding of the phenomena discussed by our
participants.

Several measures were taken to ensure trustworthiness of this study. First,
the interviews were conducted jointly by two of the authors of this
manuscript, both of whom were undergraduate students studying physics at the
time of the interviews. Their positions as physics students with varied
underrepresented identities awarded them with an insider researcher
membership, providing the interviewers with a shared language and experiential
base, as well as legitimacy and credibility with the participants Dwyer and
Buckle (2009).

Furthermore, the third researcher of this study is not a member of the physics
community. As such, the third researcher is an outsider researcher, which
provided the team with an outsider perspective. While we recognize that being
an insider researcher does not necessarily affect objectivity, by including an
outsider researcher on the team it addresses concerns that some scholars have
expressed with the potential of insider researchers having a “personal
position being ‘too close’ for objectivity” Fleming (2018). Furthermore, by
conducting two interviews with each participant, this provided extended
observations and supplied opportunities for member checking Lincoln and Guba
(1985).

Additionally, we utilized investigator triangulation, by ensuring each
transcript was coded by at least two different members of the research team
and having all differing codes reconciled in conjunction with the third member
of the team. This intercoder agreement process allowed for multiple checks on
coding and interpretation, to ensure stability and accuracy of the coding
process Campbell  _et al._ (2013).

##  III Results

In this section, we begin by discussing the general challenges experienced by
participants when pursuing their physics degree, making a point to emphasize
when one of their underrepresented identities compounded those experiences. We
then discuss the challenges that were specifically unique to certain
underrepresented identity groups.

The participant quotes used in this paper are denoted with their pseudonym and
the total number of URI’s of the participant who stated the quote (e.g. 3
URI’s indicates the participant had three underrepresented identities). Due to
the small participant pool for this study, we have chosen not to tie the
specific URI’s that each participant identifies with to their pseudonym in
order to better protect their identities. We further chose to use the pronouns
they/them whenever referring to any of our participants, to also help protect
the participants’ identities. As a final note, while many of our participants
were earning the physics major with a concentration in astronomy offered by
the Physics Department, throughout the paper we use only the word physics in
place of physics/astronomy for readability purposes.

###  III.1 General Challenges

Although all of the participants experienced some form of support while
pursuing the physics major, they all also experienced at least one challenge,
regardless of their number of URI’s. While most obstacles were not specific to
any single URI, it is important to note that the participants with a higher
number of URI’s discussed these challenges more frequently and sometimes
within the context of their URI’s. The most prevalent challenges discussed by
our participants were: difficult course content, pedagogy, competitive
environment, lack of community, and lack of mentorship. In this section we
will discuss each of these challenges and will emphasize when certain URI’s
compounded the complexity of the experience.

####  III.1.1 Difficult Content

A concern that all of our participants expressed while pursuing their physics
degree is the difficult content and excessive mathematics load needed to do
physics. This not only involved the depth of the mathematics classes that they
had to take, but also how the mathematics was utilized within their physics
courses. For example, many of the students talked about having to do a lot of
memorization and symbol manipulation for their physics classes. Combining this
with the fast-paced environment of the physics classroom and the time-
consuming nature of the content, the participants often felt overwhelmed by
what they needed to learn to be successful in their physics classes. As Beau
noted:

_Remembering definitions and concepts and formulas, I say sometimes. I mean,
also physics is about math. So you need to remember the math… So depending, it
kind of gets sometimes confusing because you’re learning so many new concepts,
you kind of have to develop different, like a way to understand things. It’s
challenging, it’s enjoyable, but it’s challenging, and not every time you
enjoy it. (Beau, 4 URI’s)_

Beau talked about how one of their physics classes was so much work and so
time-consuming, that they actually had to quit their job that semester so they
could focus on that one class.

_Yeah, because before I had C-, C+ in the class, and then I was like, you need
to focus on this class. I quit my job. And that, I started putting two hours
into $\langle$watching$\rangle$ the $\langle$lecture$\rangle$ videos every
day… Your grade basically relies on one exam. (Beau, 4 URI’s)_

Notably, Beau identifies with the low socioeconomic URI, and thus had no means
of additional financial support when they made this decision to quit their
job, putting additional strain on themself in order to be successful in this
course.

In addition to the difficult, fast-paced nature of their classes, some
participants noted that they also experienced adversities during college due
to a lack of knowing how to approach professors and not being familiar with
efficient study methods. Brooklyn’s experience, as a first- generation college
student, is an example of a compounded experience by those with parents who
did not have a post high school education and did not know how to navigate the
system.

_I think high school prepared me for more, kind of just get a job, not go to
college… I was not prepared to study. I was not prepared to actually read the
books given to us. Um, I wasn’t really prepared on, like, how to ask
professors good questions, and like, how to go to office hours without, like,
sending them [the professors] emails. (Brooklyn, 4 URI’s)_

Although both first-generation college students and those whose parents have
gone to college may experience this difficult transition to college, by not
having family members to rely on for guidance and advice, first-generation
college students have fewer resources to build on. Furthermore, with the
difficult, fast-paced nature of the physics major, our participants talked
about how once they got behind in one of their courses it was nearly
impossible to catch up.

####  III.1.2 Pedagogy and Assessments

Nine of our 11 participants believed that certain pedagogical choices made by
their physics professors ended up hindering their learning within the
classroom. For example, some students stated that the amount of content they
were expected to learn in their courses often felt unreasonable to learn in
one semester. They believed that this created an environment that was too
fast-paced, and where it was expected by the faculty that the majority of
students would struggle to keep up. Eleanor noted:

_And to throw that much content into one class seems just illegal. Like it’s,
you’re learning everything. You’re learning all of pure math in one semester
in one class that you have two times a week and then you have to know all of
it off the top of your brain for the oral exam. And it just, it feels, it
feels wrong. (Eleanor, 1 URI)_

The format of having oral exams in some of their classes was discussed by many
of our participants. It is noteworthy that the difficulty of a course with
oral exams was discussed by a variety of our participants regardless of their
number of URI’s, including Floyd who identifies with 0 URI’s.

_I would say even to this day, $\langle$course$\rangle$ is the hardest physics
class and the hardest class I have ever taken in college that demanded a lot;
it didn’t help that we had oral exams; just like our entire grade dependent on
essentially. Uh, yeah, that was, I did learn some cool interesting material
from it. Like, I did actually learn the subject material, but [the professor]
just went so fast that learning it all was very difficult. And then just the
amount that he demanded you to know, like, a moment’s notice specifically on
the exam was terrifying. (Floyd, 0 URI’s)_

In addition to the fast pace of the courses and oral exams, many of our
participants also expressed concerns about not having a variety of assessments
in their physics courses. In particular, multiple students stated that they
wished they had more homework assigned in their classes. While some
participants said they would prefer for this homework to be collected and
graded, others thought that it should be assigned but not graded. Either way,
many of the participants believed that they did not know how well they were
comprehending the material until after taking a test, which was already too
late. As Dolly stated:

_I’m also taking $\langle$course$\rangle$. It is a very interesting class.
We’re not following the textbook too closely. We are kind of jumping around
all over the place. There are no homework assignments at all. [The professor]
doesn’t even assign us problems. He kind of does; he’ll say “Maybe look at,
look at problem 3.5 in the text” or something like that but that’s only it in
terms of homework. The grades we have in the class are through exams; that’s
the only feedback we’re getting. (Dolly, 2 URI’s)_

The students also often expressed concerns with the culture of exams given
within the Physics Department as well. Overall, the students felt like the
exams given were not do-able. For the vast majority of their courses, the
average on most tests was a failing grade and then the professors would curve
the tests accordingly. This set a really negative tone for the students,
however, always making them feel discouraged and not smart enough, regardless
of what their final grade in the classes ended up being. Eleanor noted:

_It sucks that so many Physics classes, like everyone does bad on exams and
everyone said that and I believed them, but then when I started doing bad on
exams, it’s like, God, this sucks. Like seeing you get a 50 $\%$ on an exam.
And then knowing that you’re at the, like the top of this class, it’s like,
this is, there’s something wrong here. This is not; like something needs to be
fixed. And I don’t want to go through that again. I don’t want to have to see
a 50$\%$ on an exam, like I don’t, I don’t need to see that. (Eleanor, 1 URI)_

As noted by Eleanor, constantly receiving failing grades on exams even when
they are “doing okay” in their classes is really disheartening for the
students. These students want more reassurance that their efforts are paying
off. As Asher shared:

_The first time I heard “You are doing okay [in this class]” was from
$\langle$Professor D$\rangle$ and that was sophomore year… Please, I want to
know I’m doing okay sometimes. I want to not have to go home and throw my
things and then fall asleep on the couch because I’m just utterly exhausted.
(Asher, 5 URI’s)_

Because of these pedagogical choices and the “nothing’s ever good enough”
culture within the physics classes, it often affected these students in very
impactful ways, including their physical health. Asher, who identifies with
both a learning and physical disability, discussed experiencing health issues
due to one of their courses:

_I really, really struggled with $\langle$Professor E$\rangle$. I was so
depressed in that class towards the end. Like that middle portion, not like,
really towards the end, but that middle portion. I had a hard time eating, I
had a hard time sleeping. Like that, that was when I started having [a
specific health problem] actually. And so my doctor is like, “Hey I don’t know
what’s going on, but stop”. (Asher, 5 URI’s)_

####  III.1.3 Competitive environment

When discussing the atmosphere of the department, four of the participants
stated that they felt like their physics classes were intentionally designed
to be competitive and cutthroat, with them having to compete with their peers
for grades. Moreover, they also discussed feeling like they needed to compete
with their fellow peers in order to get research spots or departmental
achievements as well. Asher talked about the pressure they feel to compare
themselves to certain students, and how this contributed to competitiveness
towards grades and research positions.

_I don’t feel like any of us are doing each other any favors if we’re always
comparing ourselves to $\langle$Student A$\rangle$ because that is what I hear
from everybody… the way the department has made us feel like, it’s so
competitive. (Asher, 5 URI’s)_

This competitive nature made many students feel fixated on their grades. As
Eleanor stated:

_I mean, there were some people who were kind of, I don’t want to say
obsessive over grades, but it was like all they would talk about. And then
when you would do worse, it was like you kind of felt bad. (Eleanor, 1 URI)_

Also, Floyd shared that they felt the upper division physics courses were even
more competitive than the entry-level ones:

_It did feel more competitive because now you know it wasn’t just like an
intro level class where you had, like, other majors in there. It was a lot
more like this is the physics cohort class so its competitiveness was
definitely upped (Floyd, 0 URI’s)._

An additional important detail was that some of the participants talked about
a lack of acknowledgement from faculty towards students’ efforts to be
successful despite their demanding academic and personal challenges. Asher
stated:

_It takes grit to do what we do, it takes a lot of grit. And I know people who
have that grit who would never consider doing this. I want us to be recognized
for what we’ve been put through and I don’t think the professors do that
enough. (Asher, 5 URI’s)_

####  III.1.4 Lack of community

Of our 11 participants, nine of them expressed that throughout their time
pursuing the physics major, they felt disconnected from the faculty in the
Physics Department. It is important to note that all of these nine
participants had at least 1 URI, while the only two participants who had 0
URI’s were the only two who did not express these concerns. Often, the
disconnect discussed was expressed as a lack of personal/human interaction
with their professors, as well as with the department overall. For instance,
Eleanor discussed feeling not cared about by their professors:

_I don’t feel like I was encouraged or discouraged. I feel like professors
really, I don’t want to say they didn’t care, but they, it kind of felt like
they didn’t care, like I don’t know. I feel like they always said that they
cared. And I think they believe themselves. I don’t think they’re lying, but I
also don’t think they actively did things to make me feel like I was cared for
at all. (Eleanor, 1 URI)_

For some of the participants with this concern, they believed that this lack
of connection actually hindered them academically. As Clio stated:

_I have barely talked to professors outside the class, with the exception of
$\langle$course$\rangle$ last semester, I got help with the homework. But
other than that, I just don’t, because I’m not used to talking to professors
or teachers, and I don’t know how to do it. So I would rather ask my peers
first and then if that doesn’t work, just not do it. Which isn’t the way to go
about things, but I just don’t know how to talk to professors and, like they
all kind of scare me just a little bit. (Clio, 3 URI’s)_

Similarly, Dolly shared:

_I don’t really communicate too much with [professors]. The biggest time I
reached out to them was when I was looking for a research advisor. I reached
out to one professor, and I didn’t get an answer. I’m assuming it’s because he
was very busy, and he was very busy, but I didn’t really appreciate not
getting an answer. (Dolly, 2 URI’s)_

Not receiving a response from this professor made Dolly feel neglected.
Although the professor they initially reached out to already had many
alternate commitments, they believed that getting any response to their
research request, even a no, would have at least not made them feel ignored.

A lack of community amongst the physics students themselves was also a theme
that arose within our data. Surprisingly, this was the case for students
regardless of whether they were early on in the program or more advanced in
their coursework. Some participants credited it partly to a lack of group work
in their physics classes, which they believed would allow them to work more
closely with their peers to develop those relationships. As Beau noted:

_I think physics, in the department has been more like a department and not
taking the steps to make it like an academic community in a way, like
encouragement to make it an academic community. Like the professors would talk
about, “Hey, you have to do a senior research in your senior year”…but they
never talk, I mean, they never tell you, “Hey, how about you group up with
your friends?”…they never, like kind of create a community, create a group
amongst yourselves, like try to improve that network, the relationship between
the students to improve your knowledge. (Beau, 4 URI’s)_

Many of our participants talked about wanting to develop stronger friendships
with their physics peers, since they all take so many classes together and
have similar professional goals, but they felt like their relationships with
those peers generally stayed at surface level, hindering that sense of
community. Some of the participants even discussed being unsure if their peers
liked them, for example, Asher stated:

_I’m going to be quite honest. I was of the opinion sophomore year that like,
all of you hated me. (Asher, 5 URI’s)_

We note that Asher has 5 URI’s and was the only one to express such a strong
statement about their peers. In contrast, the two participants with 0 URI’s
did not express any concern about fitting in or belonging to their peer group.

####  III.1.5 Lack of mentorship

When asked about their path through the physics major and plans for their
future careers, five participants expressed concerns about the lack of
mentoring they received concerning these topics, while four discussed not
knowing what to do with their degree post-graduation. In particular, we
identified a common theme that the students seemed to believe only two paths
are available to them as physics majors, as described best by Floyd:

_The implication is that you’re either going into grad school to continue
that, or you’re going to become like an engineer, for instance. (Floyd, 0
URI’s)_

Eleanor shared that they did not know what to do with a physics degree and
that they felt like they had to figure it all out on their own:

_I remember sitting at orientation and talking to the advisor and like,
realizing that, I had no idea what I was doing. Like I had no idea what
careers were out there for physics majors. And I mean, you just kind of went
with the flow and hoped that you were doing the right things, and no one ever
really went out of their way to tell you like, like, hey, this is what you
should be thinking about. (Eleanor, 1 URI)_

Yet another participant, Clio, talked about wanting more guidance on what to
do after graduating, in addition to how they should proceed through the
physics major itself:

_Mostly [I’d like] just a little bit more guidance with how to work your way
through the major and like, specifically toward the end senior project stuff.
Like graduation. Guidance toward grad school, if that’s what you want to do.
Maybe like better setting of expectations with freshmen of how often should
you meet with your department advisor? Just like, give me a handout for me to
keep, to hold onto for the four years, so I remember. (Clio, 3 URI’s)_

###  III.2 Challenges Unique to Specific Identity Groups

While all of the participants spoke about challenges that they faced in
pursuing a physics major, eight of the nine participants with URI’s mentioned
experiencing challenges that were specifically related to one or more of their
URI’s. We stress here that throughout the interviews, participants almost
always spoke of their URI’s having a negative impact on their experiences in
the major. In fact, only two of the participants expressed a benefit from one
of their URI’s. To that point, in this section we will focus only on the
challenges related to participants’ URI’s, which include being a first-
generation college student, coming from a low socio-economic background,
having a learning disability, identifying as a woman or non-binary, and being
a member of the LGTBQ+ community. Additionally, we place emphasis, when
necessary, on those experiences which clearly relate to the intersection of a
participant’s URI’s. We find it worthy to note that while four of our
participants identify as a racial minority, none of them discussed challenges
that they credited specifically to their race.

Four of our participants discussed the difficulties they experienced by being
a first-generation college student. They talked about struggles with
navigating college, along with the stress and pressure induced from their
family of pursuing a difficult degree. As Dolly stated, their first-
generation identity manifested as unawareness in knowing how college works:

_I guess me sort-of being a first-generation college student and not
necessarily having the background of how universities work. My mom did a
2-year college degree, and my dad did a trade school or started doing a trade.
The only other person in my family so far who has gone to college and
completed it was my older cousin and I’m sort of close to her. But she did not
do the science realm. So, yeah, I guess for like, not knowing how universities
work so much. (Dolly, 2 URI’s)_

In other words, Dolly felt that there were unspoken norms and understandings
of how college works that they needed to learn on their own in addition to
their academic studies.

Another participant, Deacon, talked about the stress they felt with being one
of the first to pursue college and a science degree. They said:

_So, not only was I the first of the very few in my family to go to the
university, I was the only one going into a science field, you know what I
mean? So, there was a bit of stress there. Because part of me would just want
to make everybody happy, you know, going into the university and I wanted to
show people that I could do it. (Deacon, 2 URI’s)_

Additionally, Brooklyn discussed the pressure they felt from their family to
not just do well at the undergraduate level, but to also pursue a doctoral
degree.

_I am a first-generation college student and like I said before, the majority
of my family never did anything past high school if they even finished high
school. So, I think when people saw that I was the smart one in my family, I
was very much pushed to just do more than anyone else has done in my family.
Like, even now, my dad has said multiple times like “A bachelor’s would be
really cool, but could you imagine being Dr. $\langle$last name$\rangle$?”
(Brooklyn, 4 URI’s)_

As a first-generation college student, having a strong support system is vital
for success in college. The lack of information on the inner workings of
college and the additional pressure these participants felt from their family,
meant that these students had additional challenges to face as compared to
their non- first-generation peers.

Some of our participants who were first- generation college students also
identified as low socio-economic status, which made their transition to
college even more difficult. For example, Carter talked about going to a
poorly funded high school that did not have advanced coursework, so they felt
they had additional academic challenges when making the transition to college,
while simultaneously trying to understand how college works.

_Coming from a school that was, like the highest class we had was like pre-
calc. That was a little, a little hard, but then like going into college and
realizing, oh, well we still gotta, like, I mean, I guess I could start with
calc one, but I definitely should just try and redo a little bit of things.
Get used to being in college. So, and I think that’s one thing, some people
don’t like realize making the jump, it was a lot harder. (Carter, 3 URI’s)_

The intersection of this participant’s socioeconomic status and first-
generation college student status resulted in them deciding to take additional
coursework in college, which was not the case for some of their peers who did
not have these intersecting social identities.

Another impactful URI for two of the participants was having a learning
disability. The participants with this URI discussed the extra challenges they
faced in learning content, as well as physics courses not being a friendly
environment for those with a learning disability. Brooklyn talked about how
they feel that they are expected to just put up with certain things in
physics, despite having a disability:

_In the disability aspect as well, I think it’s definitely a conundrum in the
science aspect that if you are here, you’re expected to be smart, and you’re
expected to just put up with a lot of things… especially in, like, our Physics
Department, there’s a lot of things that are kind of, like, oh, can we just
like, you know, wave that off? (Brooklyn, 4 URI’s)_

In the context of the interview, when Brooklyn is saying that professors want
to “wave that off”, we interpret this as Brooklyn stating that their physics
professors did not always want to provide them with all of the accommodations
that they are allowed to by law. Additionally, Asher expressed their concerns
with the fast-paced nature of physics, and how it is difficult for them to
learn in that type of environment.

_Physics and astronomy, the way they’re currently taught is they are so fast
paced… I learn really slowly, like I have to take my time and. That’s because
I have… a learning disorder. So it takes me a significantly longer amount of
time… just to read a chapter of the book, let alone understand the information
and be able to do something with it. So, physics is hard on its own, adding a
learning disability on top of it makes it even worse. (Asher, 5 URI’s)_

All of our participants who identified as either a woman or as non-binary
expressed that their gender was a challenge for them within the major. These
concerns were often related to the lack of non-men in the major and a lack of
gender diversity amongst the department faculty. As Eleanor stated:

_I do think that obviously with women there’s less representation. As I said,
we don’t have any female professors, no one to look up to as a lady. And I
don’t know, like it did come to a point because I mean, obviously a lot of my
friends are male just because I was a physics major and most of the friends
you can make are men. And there were times where I’d just be like, oh I want
some good lady time, like I want some good lady friends. (Eleanor, 1 URI)_

A similar experience was discussed by Clio:

_Like right now in my group of physics majors, it’s me and one other girl so.
And then in the astronomy group there’s a few more. But it’s just one of those
things where it’s like yep, this is still somehow a male dominated field.
(Clio, 3 URI’s)_

The obvious lack of female physics instructors and peers at this university
was a negative experience for many of the women in the program. They believed
this lack of representation affected their ability to have mentors and peers
who they could relate to. Being a member of the LGBTQ+ community also
presented several of our participants with unique challenges. Clio, for
example, expressed that they felt like they couldn’t connect with their peers
through their LGBTQ+ identity.

_All of us are ultimately white… so then it’s just like other hidden stuff
that’s not race, like queer stuff, but like no one is going to talk about that
in class. It was only relatively recently that I had found out that more of
the people in the major are queer, and I was like “What?”. And I was like at a
party at one of their apartments, and like none of us have mentioned it again.
(Clio, 3 URI’s)_

We found it noteworthy that even after these physics majors learned that
others in the major were also part of the LGBTQ+ community, they still did not
feel comfortable enough to bring it up in later conversations. Based on
comments made by multiple participants, it seemed as though such discussions
did not feel “safe” amongst their physics peers. Asher unfortunately felt
similarly regarding some of their professors. In particular, they believed one
of their professors was intentionally misstating their pronouns.

_Yeah, he has never gotten my pronouns right once. And I’ve told him multiple
times at this point. I think it’s on purpose. (Asher; 5 URI’s)_

Based on our data, many of the participants with multiple URI’s felt as though
they did not “fit in” in the field of physics. Asher, in particular,
explicitly spoke about the intersection of several of their URI’s and how
those make it difficult for them to pursue physics. They also discuss an
obvious lack of representation amongst the Physics Department faculty, which
was discouraging for them.

_Because [physics is] not a woman-friendly science and back then I was
identified as a woman but it’s also not an LGBTQ-friendly science, and it’s
really not a disabled friendly science. And so I and I think this is the most
important part with this question too is there are not other professors like
me in this department. (Asher, 5 URI’s)_

The intersection of Asher’s URI’s left them feeling isolated and
uncomfortable, as well as discouraged by the obvious lack of role models
amongst the department faculty.

##  IV Discussion

This study set out: 1) to explore the challenges faced by college students
when earning an undergraduate degree in physics, 2) to learn what challenges
were unique to, or compounded for, students with underrepresented identities,
and 3) to better understand the challenges experienced by individuals with
specific underrepresented identities or who live at the intersection of
multiple underrepresented identities. We will discuss our findings related to
these research questions below.

All of our participants faced challenges when pursuing their degree in
physics. We categorized their most common challenges as: difficult content,
pedagogy and assessments, competitive environment, lack of community, and lack
of mentorship. When considering each of these categories separately, we note
that many of these categories involved both academic challenges and
environmental challenges within the same category, and that these two types of
challenges were not mutually exclusive. For example, the students who
discussed pedagogical and assessment choices made by their professors as a
challenge talked about how this challenge affected them academically but also
affected the tone of the environment in which they studied and learned.
Therefore, our findings suggest that the general challenges experienced by
physics majors are both academic and environmental in nature, and furthermore
that these two types of challenges (academic and environmental) are likely to
impact each other.

Although we found that all of our participants did face some challenges while
pursuing their physics major, it was clear that those with underrepresented
identities expressed having more challenges than those without URI’s. In fact,
the more URI’s a participant identified with, the more challenges they seemed
to encounter.

Most notable from our results is that only students with underrepresented
identities discussed feelings of “not belonging” amongst their peers and
stated there being a lack of community within the department. Furthermore, the
students with underrepresented identities expressed different concerns
regarding mentorship. While participants with underrepresented identities felt
that they had inadequate mentoring from their faculty on multiple accounts,
those with no underrepresented identities only had concerns with mentoring
that surrounded what to do with their degree post-graduation. Therefore, we
conclude that feelings of lack of community and lack of support seem to be
more frequently experienced by students with underrepresented identities. It
is important to note that good mentorship for any student cannot be
overstated, especially since previous research suggests that a lack of faculty
support can negatively impact the persistence of students in scientific
disciplines Ceglie and Settlage (2016). The role of a mentor is to help
cultivate not only the student’s academic abilities, but to also assist them
in how to apply for opportunities like fellowships, graduate school programs,
jobs, etc. Kram (1985); Murrell  _et al._ (1999). This assists the students in
becoming more confident and well-rounded professionals. It also helps build
community.

It was clear from our data that the participants with one or more URI’s were
not receiving the mentorship they desired. While many factors may contribute
to this, we wonder if this finding relates in part to the perceptions of
faculty in the field regarding “fixed” vs “growth” mindsets in physics. It is
said that someone has a “fixed” mindset if they believe that it takes innate
talent and aptitude for someone to be successful within a field, while someone
is considered to have a “growth” mindset if they believe that with effort
individuals can learn and excel in the field over time Dweck (2006). Previous
research has found that faculty, post-doctoral fellows, and graduate students
in physics are more likely than scholars in all other STEM fields (other than
mathematics), to believe that it takes innate talent to be successful in the
field of physics Leslie  _et al._ (2015). These scholars also found a notable
correlation that disciplines (both STEM and non-STEM) with strong perspectives
of “fixed” mindsets have lower rates of women and African American scholars in
those fields than disciplines with more “growth” mindsets. In their work,
these scholars attribute this finding in part to societal stereotypes of who
possesses innate talent in those fields.

Given that our participants with at least one URI do not fit the traditional
“image” of a physicist, it is entirely possible that the faculty at this
particular university inadvertently treated them as not having the innate
talent that the faculty perceived as needed to be successful in physics, which
may have resulted in them receiving fewer mentorship opportunities. In fact,
research has shown that underrepresented students who had instructors with
“fixed” mindsets towards their students’ abilities had worse motivational
beliefs than students in courses with instructors with “growth” mindsets Dweck
(2006). Furthermore, this “fixed” mindset may further propagate the harmful
stereotype that to be successful in physics you must be brilliant, which can
negatively affect those that identify as women or with a disability Meyer  _et
al._ (2015); Traxler and Blue (2020).

Additionally, the structure of the content, pedagogical approaches, and
competitive environment frequently experienced in the physics courses at this
institution caused many of the participants to express feelings of self-doubt
and low self-efficacy in their academic abilities, which may also further
inhibit one’s connection to physics and the development of a physics identity
Hazari  _et al._ (2010). Combining these factors developed an atmosphere that
created unnecessary challenges for all of the participants, especially those
with URI’s. Indeed, the individualistic nature of the courses do not align
with the cooperative learning environment that many of the participants
expressed a desire for. This discrepancy may be harmful not only to the
students’ abilities to form a collaborative community, but also to their
academic development. For many students, particularly those who identify as
women, previous research has shown that this lack of community and competitive
academic environment can negatively impact their mindset on their ability to
do physics and negatively affect their academic performance Kalender  _et al._
(2022).

In addition to participants with underrepresented identities simply having
more challenges, we found that there were some challenges that were directly
tied to participants with certain underrepresented identities, or that were
compounded at the intersection of their URI’s. For example, when our
participants with URI’s discussed how their URI’s influenced their challenges,
academic challenges were most frequently discussed in the context of having a
disability, being a first-generation college student, or being from a low
socio-economic status. In particular, although all of our participants
discussed the demanding nature of their physics courses, the participants with
a learning and/or physical disability discussed these concerns more
frequently. They found that the pedagogical approaches of many of their
physics’ courses presented them with additional academic barriers that they
did not necessarily experience in their non-physics courses. Additionally,
almost half of our participants were first-generation college students, and
each one of them discussed this identity at some point during the interviews.
All but one of these participants viewed their first-generation status as
providing them with additional academic challenges as a physics major222The
one participant who spoke of this identity as a supprt stated that they used
this identity as additional self-motivation to succeed.. Furthermore, the
participants that had both a first-generation student status and identified as
coming from a low socioeconomic background talked about the combination of
these identities being a detriment to pursuing their major, an intersectional
phenomenon that has been cited elsewhere in the literature Engle and Tinto
(2008). Hence, we believe that the curricular design of the condensed and
fast-paced physics coursework is not an accessible environment, especially to
those with certain underrepresented identities.

In addition to compounding academic challenges, these specific identities were
also found in our study to exacerbate environmental challenges, such as a
sense of belonging and access to mentoring from faculty. This phenomenon has
been shown by other research as well. For example, it is known that STEM
students with learning disabilities have been underrepresented in the STEM
fields due to low learning expectations from others, lack of mentorship and
role models, and a lack of individual supports Marino (2010); Science and
Council (2018). Research further suggests that first-generation college
students, especially those entering STEM fields, are more likely to harbor
feelings of self-doubt while simultaneously less likely to feel a sense of
belonging. This appears to affect the development of their science identity,
which is critical because one’s science identity is a better predictor of
academic success for first-generation college students, as compared to their
non-first-generation peers Chen  _et al._ (2021). Furthermore, previous
research indicates that the intersection of being low-income and first-
generation puts such students at a lower rate of attaining their bachelor’s
degree, without having an extensive support system Chen (2005); Choy (2000);
Nunez and Cuccaro-Alamin (1998). Hence, supports within undergraduate physics
departments are important to assist students with these identities,
particularly because having a strong support system is vital for success in
college Gibbons  _et al._ (2019).

A lack of community and support was also noted by our participants in the
context of other specific underrepresented identities, such as being a woman
or being a member of the LGBTQ+ community. In particular, multiple
participants discussed feeling uncomfortable sharing their LGBTQ+ identity
with their physics peers and the physics faculty, or discussed feeling as
though they were invalidated when they did share. In this context, these
participants found it more difficult to navigate obtaining academic assistance
from their physics faculty and felt more isolated from their physics peers.
These experiences and lack of support are consistent with those found through
previous research Barthelemy  _et al._ (2022).

When considering the specific underrepresented identities of our participants,
one distinction we found important to note was that many of our participants
who were members of the LGBTQ+ community or who had disabilities often
referred to these as “hidden identities”. In other words, these were
identities that they saw as greatly affecting their experiences as individuals
and as physics students, yet they were also identities which they could keep
hidden from their faculty and peers if they chose to, which they saw as
different from their gender and race/ethnicity. In some ways they saw this as
giving them more control over their experience but in other ways they saw this
as causing them more of a burden, as they did not always feel that they could
bring their full selves to the physics classroom.

Finally, we note that our participants who are living at the intersection of
multiple underrepresented identities (such as being a member of the LGBTQ+
community and having a disability, or being a member of the LGBTQ+ community
and identifying as a woman) discussed it being difficult to navigate multiple
underrepresented identities at once and that this compounded their lack of
belonging. Research has shown that these experiences are not unique to our
participants and have been reported by other individuals in STEM, where the
more underrepresented identities a person has, the more discrimination,
isolation, and harassment they have encountered Barthelemy  _et al._ (2022);
Hennessey  _et al._ (2019). Environments like the ones described by members of
these groups make it exceedingly difficult for them to feel welcomed and
included and make it challenging for them to identify potential allies.

###  IV.1 Recommendations

Based on our work and the work of others, it is clear that there is a need to
improve the conditions and experiences discussed throughout this paper. We
believe there should be a focus on more inclusive pedagogical practices, as
well as departmental practices that are inclusive and identify the different
needs of students.

Extant research has shown that utilizing non-lecture teaching techniques
within the physics classroom is beneficial for all students, including those
with URI’s. Furthermore, research has shown that group-based problem solving
can lead to more creativity and inventiveness Bergin  _et al._ (2018). In
particular, one approach that has been implemented utilizes problem-based
cooperative learning (PBCL) in an undergraduate physics laboratory course,
which combines models of problem-based H  _et al._ (2012); C  _et al._ (2011)
and cooperative A  _et al._ (2005); P  _et al._ (1992) learning. This method
encourages a more learner-centered approach in which the students self-
reported a deeper understanding of the scientific process and higher-order
problem-solving skills, compared to traditional manual-based laboratory
courses. Additionally, the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) cas (2023), is
a pedagogical approach meant to improve the learning environment for students
with special needs by providing multiple means of engagement, representation,
and action and expression. Research shows that this approach offers students a
non-linear approach to learning Rappolt-Schlichtmann  _et al._ (2012),
assisting those who have a learning disability by focusing on “fixing” the
curriculum rather than repeatedly addressing individual student needs.

Another potential instructional approach is through a method called Modeling
Instruction, which includes conceptually based instruction, culturally
sensitive instruction, and cooperative learning. This method was studied
extensively at a Hispanic-serving institution and reported that the Modeling
Instruction method was nearly seven times more successful than standard
lecture-based instruction Brewe  _et al._ (2010a). The results of this study
also showed that, by using the Modeling Instruction method, ethnically
underrepresented students at this university showed no difference in the odds
of success in introductory university physics when compared to the ethnic-
majority students. Additionally, female students, when compared to their male
counterparts, also showed no difference in the odds of success in introductory
university physics. Therefore, this method was found to provide equitable
access to introductory physics content to individuals with a variety of social
identities.

We recognize that a dramatic change to physics pedagogy is not a change that
can happen without effort. Scholars at the University of Colorado Boulder
Bennett  _et al._ (2020); Hinko  _et al._ (2016) have already begun
investigating how such changes can be made more easily. In the context of an
informal after-school outreach program, these scholars have created a taxonomy
of pedagogical modes displayed by physics educators: instruction mode (lecture
style), consultation mode (supporting student engagement without taking
control), and participation mode (a student/instructor partner-like approach),
as well as have evidence of a mixed-modes method which combines these modes
Bennett  _et al._ (2020). This work is aimed at understanding the factors that
influence university physics educators’ pedagogy and has implications for
constructing university educator training and preparation. In their work,
these scholars provide recommendations to improve and broaden formal
pedagogical training for university educators in physics. These
recommendations include experiences such as pre- and post-semester training.
Although originally intended to train undergraduate physics teaching
volunteers to develop strong content knowledge and effective pedagogical
skills Chini  _et al._ (2016), we believe similar trainings on inquiry-based
teaching methods could be beneficial for physics faculty as well. Since many
university-level physics educators have never received formal pedagogical
training, aside from potentially minimal training provided to those who had
obtained teaching assistant positions during graduate school, we believe
pedagogical training opportunities may be interesting and useful to many
university physics instructors.

In addition to improving classroom pedagogy, our work suggests that a change
in departmental culture may also be beneficial to physics undergraduate
students, especially those with underrepresented identities. A departmental-
wide emphasis on creating a welcoming and supportive environment for students
entering a physics major would assist in developing a learning environment
that helps all students thrive academically and professionally Schipull  _et
al._ (2019); Ceglie and Settlage (2016); Atherton  _et al._ (2016); Thomson
(2022); Brewe  _et al._ (2010b). One way to motivate this change is by
providing workshops designed to educate faculty on how curriculum, pedagogy,
and departmental practices can be altered to be more inclusive with the intent
to ensure a more equitable and welcoming experience for all students.

Additionally, we believe a more inclusive approach to mentoring is also
needed. The role of mentorship, especially for those with underrepresented
identities, is crucial in helping to develop a student’s physics identity, as
well as improving the retention rate and success of minoritized students in
physics Kram (1985); Murrell  _et al._ (1999); Carter-Johnson (2016); Feder
(2019). Having dedicated mentorship programs that focus on delivering an
individualized and natural support system to foster a more welcoming and
inclusive atmosphere within physics departments is also necessary.

These types of improvements could make it easier for students to navigate the
physics space, break down the long-standing idea of who a physicist is
Griffith (2010); Malcom  _et al._ (1976); Marchand and Taasoobshirazi (2013);
Meador (2018); Ong (2005); Wieman (2020), and move towards creating a more
inclusive field. For example, recent work on redefining what it means to be a
physicist has shown positive impacts on students’ sense of identity and
belonging Baylor  _et al._ (2022). Also, there have been recent
recommendations from research, which include improving departmental faculty’s
understanding of how financial challenges impact learning and engagement, and
encouraging more empathy and compassion from faculty for students Peña  _et
al._ (2022). Moreover, existing inequities for members of the LGBTQ+ community
and others can begin to be addressed by the recent recommendations made by the
Ad-Hoc Committee on LGBTQ+ Issues to the American Physical Society Atherton
_et al._ (2016).

###  IV.2 Limitations and Future Work

While this work aimed to fill a gap in the literature by including identities
not traditionally considered in physics education research, it is not without
its limitations. Our sample consisted of only 11 participants at one
university. This restricts our ability to draw certain conclusions about
physics students’ experience more globally. Furthermore, although we included
two participants with 0 URI’s in our work, it is possible that their
experiences were not typical of physics students with 0 URI’s. Therefore, our
finding that only students with one or more URI’s experience a lack of
belonging and lack of community throughout their physics experience may not be
generalizable more broadly, depending on the individuals and the context.

Future work should expand on this project by recruiting a larger pool of
participants from multiple universities. Furthermore, future research could
also be expanded to include students at two-year colleges to address their
experiences prior to attending a four-year institution. This approach would
allow for a broader and more diverse perspective in order to make more
definitive conclusions and suggestions to address the issues presented here.

We also found our participants’ perspectives on “hidden identities” to be an
important one. It would be interesting for future research on intersectional
identities to explore, in more depth, the differences in experiences in
physics by individuals with such “hidden” underrepresented identities,
individuals with more visible underrepresented identities, and individuals who
have a combination of both “hidden” and more visible underrepresented
identities to better understand how having “hidden” underrepresented
identities affect the physics experience differently.

## Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the participants of this study for honestly
and openly sharing their experiences with us. We would also like to thank the
anonymous reviewers of this manuscript for their helpful feedback.

## References

  * aps (2020a) “Bachelor’s degrees in physics and stem earned by women,” https://www.aps.org/programs/education/statistics/womenstem.cfm (2020a).
  * nsf (2020) “Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering,” https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf21321/report/field-of-degree-minorities (2020).
  * aps (2020b) “Degrees earned by individuals marginalized by race/ethnicity in physics,” https://www.aps.org/programs/education/statistics/minorityphysics.cfm (2020b).
  * Cech and Waidzunas (2011) E. A. Cech and T. J. Waidzunas, Engineering Studies 3, 1 (2011).
  * Yosso  _et al._ (2009) T. Yosso, W. Smith, M. Ceja, and D. Solórzano, Harvard Educational Review 79, 659–691 (2009).
  * S  _et al._ (1998) H. S, C. DF, and K. D, New Directions for Institutional Research 1998, 53–63 (1998).
  * A and F (2006) A. A and K. F, International Journal of Doctoral Studies 1, 21–33 (2006).
  * TL (2010) S. TL, The Review of Higher Education 33, 307–322 (2010).
  * Barthelemy  _et al._ (2016) R. S. Barthelemy, M. McCormick, and C. Henderson, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12 (2016).
  * Doucette and Singh (2020) D. Doucette and C. Singh, Phys. Teach. 58, 297 (2020).
  * Abdurrahman and Olmstead (2021) F. Abdurrahman and A. Olmstead, PERC (2021).
  * Santana and Singh (2021) L. M. Santana and C. Singh, in  _Physics Education Research Conference 2021_ (2021) virtual Conference.
  * Bremer and Hughes (2017) M. Bremer and R. Hughes, Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering 23, 174 (2017).
  * Santana and Singh (2023) L. M. Santana and C. Singh, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 19 (2023).
  * Hazari  _et al._ (2010) Z. Hazari, G. Sonnert, P. Sadler, and M. Shanahan, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 47, 978 (2010).
  * Quichocho  _et al._ (2020) X. Quichocho, E. Schipull, and E. Close, in  _PERC_ (2020).
  * Cwik and Singh (2022) S. Cwik and C. Singh, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 18 (2022).
  * Carlone and Johnson (2007) H. B. Carlone and A. Johnson, Journ. of Res. In Sci. Teac. 44, 8 (2007).
  * Quichocho  _et al._ (2019) X. R. Quichocho, J. Conn, E. M. Schipull, and E. W. Close, in  _Proceedings of the 2019 Physics Education Research Conference_ , edited by Y. Cao, S. Wolf, and M. B. Bennett (2019) pp. 488–493.
  * Schipull  _et al._ (2019) E. M. Schipull, X. R. Quichocho, and E. W. Close, in  _Proceedings of the 2019 Physics Education Research Conference_ , edited by Y. Cao, S. Wolf, and M. B. Bennett (2019) pp. 535–540.
  * Cech (2022) E. A. Cech, Science Advances 8, eabm7311 (2022).
  * Shields (2008) S. A. Shields, Sex roles 59, 301 (2008).
  * ros (2016) “The intersectionalities of men stem faculty: An unexplored barrier for recruiting women of color,” https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Suzanna-Rose-2/publication/ (2016).
  * Crenshaw (1989) K. Crenshaw, University of Chicago Legal Forum 1, 8 (1989).
  * Rossman and Rallis (2016) G. B. Rossman and S. F. Rallis,  _An Introduction to Qualitative Research: Learning in the Field_ (Sage Publications, 2016).
  * Seidman (2013) I. Seidman,  _Interviewing as Qualitative Research: A Guide for Researchers in Education and the Social Sciences_ (Teachers College Press, 2013).
  * (27) “Supplemental material for the list of demographic survey questions,” URL will be inserted by publisher.
  * Corbin and Strauss (2015) J. M. Corbin and A. L. Strauss,  _Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (4th ed.)_ (Sage Publications, 2015).
  * Campbell  _et al._ (2013) J. L. Campbell, C. Quincy, J. Osserman, and O. K. Pedersen, Sociological Methods & Research 42, 294 (2013).
  * Dwyer and Buckle (2009) S. C. Dwyer and J. L. Buckle, International Journal of Qualitative Methods 8, 54 (2009).
  * Fleming (2018) J. Fleming, International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning 19, 311 (2018).
  * Lincoln and Guba (1985) Y. S. Lincoln and E. G. Guba,  _Naturalistic Inquiry_ (Sage, 1985).
  * Ceglie and Settlage (2016) R. J. Ceglie and J. Settlage, Int J of Sci and Math Educ 14 (2016).
  * Kram (1985) K. Kram, Training & Development Journal (1985).
  * Murrell  _et al._ (1999) A. Murrell, F. Crosby, and R. Ely,  _Mentoring dilemmas: Developmental relationships within multi-cultural organizations_ (Taylor & Francis Inc., 1999).
  * Dweck (2006) C. S. Dweck,  _Mindset: The new psychology of success_ (Random House, 2006).
  * Leslie  _et al._ (2015) S. J. Leslie, A. Cimpian, M. Meyer, _et al._ , Science 347 (2015).
  * Meyer  _et al._ (2015) M. Meyer, A. Cimpian, and S. J. Leslie, Front. Psychol. 6 (2015).
  * Traxler and Blue (2020) A. L. Traxler and J. Blue, Phys. Educ. and Gender 8 (2020).
  * Kalender  _et al._ (2022) Z. Y. Kalender _et al._ , Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 18 (2022).
  * Engle and Tinto (2008) J. Engle and V. Tinto, “Moving beyond access: College success for low-income, first-generation students,” (2008).
  * Marino (2010) M. T. Marino, Journal of Spec. Educ. Tech. 25 (2010).
  * Science and Council (2018) N. Science and T. Council, “Charting a course for success: America’s strategy for stem education,” (2018).
  * Chen  _et al._ (2021) S. Chen, K. R. Binning, K. J. Manke, _et al._ , Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 47, 593 (2021).
  * Chen (2005) X. Chen,  _First-Generation Students in Postsecondary Education: A Look at their College Transcripts_ , Tech. Rep. (National Center for Education Statistics, 2005).
  * Choy (2000) S. Choy,  _Low-Income Students: Who They Are and How They Pay for Their Education_ , Tech. Rep. (National Center for Education Statistics, 2000).
  * Nunez and Cuccaro-Alamin (1998) A. Nunez and S. Cuccaro-Alamin,  _First-Generation Students: Undergraduates Whose Parents Never Enrolled in Postsecondary Education_ , Tech. Rep. (National Center for Education Statistics, 1998).
  * Gibbons  _et al._ (2019) M. M. Gibbons, A. Rhinehart, and E. Hardin, Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 20, 488–510 (2019).
  * Barthelemy  _et al._ (2022) R. S. Barthelemy _et al._ , Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 18 (2022).
  * Hennessey  _et al._ (2019) E. Hennessey, J. Cole, P. Shastri, _et al._ , in  _AIP Conf. Proceedings 2109_ (2019).
  * Bergin  _et al._ (2018) S. D. Bergin, C. Murphy, and A. N. Shuilleabhain, Eur. Journal. Phys. 39 (2018).
  * H  _et al._ (2012) Y. H, W. A. J, T. D, and C. A. L, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 36, 79–102 (2012).
  * C  _et al._ (2011) B.-L. C, G.-M. A, and T. J. M, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 34, 1235–53 (2011).
  * A  _et al._ (2005) S. K. A, S. S. D, J. D. W, and J. R. T, J. Eng. Educ. 94, 87–101 (2005).
  * P  _et al._ (1992) H. P, K. R, and A. S, Am. J. Phys. 60, 627–36 (1992).
  * cas (2023) “Universal design for learning,” https://www.cast.org/impact/universal-design-for-learning-udl (2023).
  * Rappolt-Schlichtmann  _et al._ (2012) G. Rappolt-Schlichtmann, S. G. Daley, and T. L. Rose,  _A research reader in universal design for learning_ (Harvard Educ. Press, 2012).
  * Brewe  _et al._ (2010a) E. Brewe, V. Sawtelle, L. H. Kramer, _et al._ , Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 6, 010106 (2010a).
  * Bennett  _et al._ (2020) M. B. Bennett, B. Fiedler, and N. D. Finkelstein, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 020137 (2020).
  * Hinko  _et al._ (2016) K. A. Hinko, P. Madigan, E. Miller, and N. D. Finkelstein, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 010111 (2016).
  * Chini  _et al._ (2016) J. J. Chini, C. L. Straub, and K. H. Thomas, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 010117 (2016).
  * Atherton  _et al._ (2016) T. J. Atherton, R. S. Barthelemy, W. Deconinck, _et al._ ,  _LGBT Climate in Physics: Building an Inclusive Community_ , Tech. Rep. (American Physical Society, 2016).
  * Thomson (2022) R. M. Thomson, Physics Today 75, 42 (2022).
  * Brewe  _et al._ (2010b) E. Brewe, V. Sawtelle, L. H. Kramer, _et al._ , Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 6 (2010b).
  * Carter-Johnson (2016) F. Carter-Johnson, Bulletin of the American Physical Society (2016).
  * Feder (2019) T. Feder, Physics Today 72, 24 (2019).
  * Griffith (2010) A. L. Griffith, Econ. Educ. Rev. 29, 911 (2010).
  * Malcom  _et al._ (1976) S. M. Malcom, P. Q. Hall, and J. W. Brown, “The double bind: The price of being a minority woman in science,” (1976).
  * Marchand and Taasoobshirazi (2013) G. C. Marchand and G. Taasoobshirazi, International Journal of Science Education 35 (2013).
  * Meador (2018) A. Meador, School Science and Mathematics 118 (2018).
  * Ong (2005) M. Ong, Social Problems 52 (2005).
  * Wieman (2020) C. Wieman, APS News: The Back Page 29 (2020).
  * Baylor  _et al._ (2022) M.-E. Baylor, J. R. Hoehn, and N. Finkelstein, Phys. Teach. 60, 172–175 (2022).
  * Peña  _et al._ (2022) C. Peña, N. Ruedas-Gracia, J. R. Cohen, _et al._ , PLoS Comput Biol. 18 (2022).