[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-393399-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-1-en-105":80,"doc-detail-393399-en":126},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":73,"head_meta":75,"extra_data":77,"updated_unix":79},105,"en","the-development-and-validation-of-a-scale-to-assess-epistemic-exclusion-in-minoritized-and-non-minoritized-stem-faculty","The Development and Validation of a Scale to Assess Epistemic Exclusion in Minoritized and Non-Minoritized STEM Faculty","","This document details the development and validation of the Faculty Epistemic Exclusion Scale (FEES), designed to assess scholarly devaluation within STEM fields. Epistemic exclusion is defined as a combination of disciplinary and identity-based biases, manifesting in both formal evaluation processes and informal colleague interactions. The research involved a validation survey of 526 tenure-track faculty, revealing significant disparities in experiences based on race and gender, with women of color reporting higher levels of exclusion.",{"@graph":14,"@context":72},[15,34,55],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/","Template",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/general/","General",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/the-development-and-validation-of-a-scale-to-assess-epistemic-exclusion-in-minoritized-and-non-minoritized-stem-faculty/393399/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/the-development-and-validation-of-a-scale-to-assess-epistemic-exclusion-in-minoritized-and-non-minoritized-stem-faculty/393399.png","ImageObject",442,249,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Sarah ","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-09-26",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":30},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",{"@type":56,"mainEntity":57},"FAQPage",[58,64,68],{"name":59,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":61},"What is the Faculty Epistemic Exclusion Scale (FEES)?","Question",{"text":62,"@type":63},"FEES is a research instrument developed to measure scholarly devaluation that faculty members experience based on disciplinary norms and identity-based stereotypes.","Answer",{"name":65,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":66},"How does epistemic exclusion manifest for faculty?",{"text":67,"@type":63},"It occurs through both formal processes, such as annual or promotion reviews, and informal interactions with colleagues, where scholarly work is treated as non-interpretable or less valuable.",{"name":69,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":70},"What did the validation survey reveal about STEM faculty experiences?",{"text":71,"@type":63},"The study of 526 STEM faculty members found that experiences of exclusion vary significantly by race and gender, with women of color reporting higher incidences of such bias.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":74,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":76,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":78,"site_id":7},393399,1791499748,{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":82},"success",[83,88,93,98,103,108,113,118,123],{"id":84,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},11,"Presentations",90,"presentations",{"id":89,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":90,"show_sort_weight":91,"slug":92},12,"Resumes",80,"resumes",{"id":94,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":95,"show_sort_weight":96,"slug":97},14,"Invoices",70,"invoices",{"id":99,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":100,"show_sort_weight":101,"slug":102},15,"Posters",60,"posters",{"id":104,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":105,"show_sort_weight":106,"slug":107},16,"Social Media",50,"social-media",{"id":109,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":110,"show_sort_weight":111,"slug":112},17,"Forms",40,"forms",{"id":114,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":115,"show_sort_weight":116,"slug":117},18,"Letters",30,"letters",{"id":119,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":121,"slug":122},21,"Paper Templates",5,"papers-templates",{"id":124,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":4,"slug":125},158,"general-158",{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":127},{"doc_id":78,"user_id":128,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":129,"doc_module":22,"category_id":124,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":130,"file_id":131,"file_url":132,"file_type":133,"file_size":134,"view_count":30,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":22,"language":135,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":136,"faqs":137,"seo_title":138,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":139,"read_time":4},962085320529,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","Responses to the new Faculty Epistemic Exclusion Scale suggest women report more  \nexclusion, especially women of color  \nThe Development and Validation of a Scale to Assess Epistemic Exclusion in Minoritized and Non-Minoritized STEM Faculty  \nWhat is epistemic exclusion? What does it look like?  \nA form of scholarly devaluation based on two interlocking forms of bias:  \nDisciplinary  \nNorms about valued scholarly inquiry  \nIdentity-Based  \nStereotypes about competence  \nFormal Epistemic Exclusion  \nBias about scholarly work during formal evaluation processes (e.g., annual review, promotion review) .  \nInformal Epistemic Exclusion  \nBias about scholarly work from colleagues in interactions and communications.  \nScale Development & Validation  \nItem Generation  \nExpert Feedback  \nCognitive Pretesting  \nValidation Survey  \nFaculty Epistemic Exclusion Scale (FEES)  \nFormal Epistemic Exclusion Subscales (\\# items)  \nInformal Epistemic Exclusion Subscales (\\# items)  \nComprehension Exclusion (8)  \nOthers perceive the scholars’ work as not interpretable  \nEpistemic Exclusion Differs by Race-Gender  \nScale Validation Survey  \n 526 STEM tenure-track faculty  \n 123 White men, 120 Men of color, 117 White women, 148 Women of color (18 missing)  \n Mean age 44 years (SD = 10, range 28-80)  \n 224 Assistant Profs, 157 Associate Profs, 145 Full Profs  \nChallenge Areas  \n Developing scale items that apply across STEM fields  \n Recruiting faculty of color  \n Differences between theoretical and empirical dimensionality  \n\\#2000021-Michigan State University: NiCole Buchanan, Michael O’ Rourke, Marisa Rink us  \n\\#2000076-University of North Texas: Martinque Jones  \n\\#2000580-University of Michigan: Isis Settles, Kristie Dotson [https://we2project.weebly.com/](https://we2project.weebly.com/)","cbCaicw14lyBgp9o","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaicw14lyBgp9o","pdf",673320,"English","# Understanding Epistemic Exclusion\n## Defining Disciplinary and Identity-Based Bias\n## Formal vs. Informal Exclusion\n# Scale Development and Validation Process\n## Item Generation and Testing\n## Participant Demographics\n# Key Findings and Challenges\n## Differences by Race-Gender\n## Implementation Challenges in STEM","[{\"question\":\"What is the Faculty Epistemic Exclusion Scale (FEES)?\",\"answer\":\"FEES is a research instrument developed to measure scholarly devaluation that faculty members experience based on disciplinary norms and identity-based stereotypes.\"},{\"question\":\"How does epistemic exclusion manifest for faculty?\",\"answer\":\"It occurs through both formal processes, such as annual or promotion reviews, and informal interactions with colleagues, where scholarly work is treated as non-interpretable or less valuable.\"},{\"question\":\"What did the validation survey reveal about STEM faculty experiences?\",\"answer\":\"The study of 526 STEM faculty members found that experiences of exclusion vary significantly by race and gender, with women of color reporting higher incidences of such bias.\"}]","The Development and Validation of a Scale to Assess Epistemic Exclusion in Minoritized and Non-Minoritized STEM Faculty | PDF",1790385605]