TABLE 1.

Critical questions: A guide to integrating critical approaches in STEM equity quantitative analyses

Question	Recommendation
How does lived experience affect how one approaches research?	Before beginning the research process, researchers should reflect on how their beliefs about the world, personal background, characteristics, and academic training influence their approaches to the study.
What theoretical assumptions are present in conceptualizations of equity practices?	Researchers should think about what equity model they are using for their analyses. For example, does equity mean students from various backgrounds are performing the same academically? Relying on Gutiérrez (2013), we argue that conceptualizations of equity should embrace how historical events and structural experiences shape present-day students’ experience, which means that strategies for empowerment will vary depending on the group of interest, location, and time period.
What analytical and interpretive choices can be made to focus on excellence?	Historically, achievement gaps have contributed to negative perceptions of students who come from minoritized backgrounds. We advocate for researchers to focus their efforts toward exploring where and how marginalized and minoritized students are excelling despite structural inequities and using that information as a guide for advancing equity.
What theoretical linkages exist between the constructs and demographic variables of interest?	Many of the constructs used in educational research were created using samples of students who are mostly white, cisgendered, male, heterosexual, able-bodied, wealthy students men from privileged institutions. As a result, the relationship between popular constructs of interest and minoritized students often include negative stereotypes. We encourage researchers to reflect on the constructs in a study and whether those constructs adequately reflect the lived experiences of the target population.
What should be considered when using standardized test (ACT/SAT) scores as a metric for “prior preparation”?	Standardized tests (ACT/SAT) have a history of being used to support racial discrimination and subordination but are commonly used in equity research. High school GPA and college course work are better indicators of a students’ prior academic preparation, especially for marginalized and minoritized students. Although subject to structural inequities, we recommend that these metrics be used instead.
What measures capture structural inequalities that exist in STEM higher education?	STEM equity researchers commonly use individual-level variables (race, gender, ability, etc.) to understand societal inequities. Although these variables capture variations that exist across groups, they do not capture the underlying mechanisms that reflect inequities. We recommend that researchers additionally incorporate structural variables into their analyses, such as campus and classroom climate measures, policies, and institutional characteristics (e.g., selectivity).
How do changes in institutional categories for demographic variables over time affect analyses?	When working with institutional data, researchers should explore whether and how institutional definitions for demographic characteristics have changed over time.
Are quantitative analyses the best tools for answering the proposed research questions?	Quantitative analyses do an adequate amount of explaining student experiences at the macro level. However, qualitative and mixed-methods research can sometimes better uncover the underlying mechanisms that contribute to student experiences. We recommend that researchers reflect on the goals of their work to see if quantitative analyses are appropriate.