I have always appreciated how technology interfaces have made it more convenient to look through graphics in a more personal way - I can analyze different aspects of the variables that are more integral to my own life and investigate differences on my own without a static graph telling me those differences upfront. This has allowed more engagement from the readers and a larger investment into the information

I appreciate how open the individuals of these groups are as they are trying to find new ways to showcase critical information that will accurately display truth and convince readers of their cause - a hard balance while still trying to ensure data is presented without misleading others

I deeply appreciated the comment on the tweet ahead of the graph. I can see what they are trying to accomplish, but it wasn't done to accurately display the data

I do frequently need this reminder - data must be humanized to represent the people the numbers and values represent.

I always understood that what we portray and give attention to dictates what we "care about" and what we want the reader to care about. However, I never truly reflected on how missing information could also show the reader what to care about - silence of data is powerful in terms of how people understand the material

This also gives individuals a better and more thorough understanding of the numbers and gives the reader more of a personalized experience where they can explore the numbers through their own interest in the content

I feel like some reports utilize strict numerical values to demonstrate the lived experience of individuals. None of the numbers mean anything without the context of who people are behind them

Interesting that the overall design of the graph and chart was not considered as highly important in creating the full perspective as personal narratives were

I agree with this 100%. It is hard to see what data means when given just numbers; stories and narratives better construct the meaning behind the data and help visualize the information

I think this should be asked at the beginning of every major task and project - what moral principals should be integrated into this experience and be at the center of the project itself?

I think this is a powerful statement to remember - ethics evolve and change to reflect society and the more we learn about the experiences of others, these values alter and adapt; therefore, there should be a solid outline and curricular for ethics in data science that acknowledges this constant change

It is very interesting to see that White is the commonly used control group that other races/ethnicities are being compared to. I wonder when this became common practice and why it has remained so over the years. I do wonder if many papers incorporate the rational behind why a group was created or used as the control now that QuantCrit research has become more visable.

This is key for my understanding; when we make claims based on quantitative data, but ignore the reality in which the numbers come from, we are part of the systematic problem

I think this is a very useful guideline for analyzing through a more QuantCrit lens. I can review and read the five tenents but seeing this list of questions aides my own reading.

I found it interesting that the data suggests that students that are non-White tend to have a larger capacity to persist in the STEM fields compared to White counterparts. Wonder what factors go into this cultural of persistence and what factors must be enhanced for all individuals to persist

curious if there was a follow-up on who stuck with the STEM field through graduation

It is crazy to me that we can study a trend over the course of a decade plus years and continually observe the same phenomena and still make no real changes towards addressing it. How are test scores still so widely used when so much data has shown that scores show discrepancies between socio-economic status, ethnicity/race, gender, etc.

I do like how this article ends with hope. Educational debts are slowly being mitigated; while this is only a small step, it provides insight into how other small steps can be made as opposed to suggesting that the only way forward is to dismantle the entire system

I noticed this during the findings portion, but to have it written out like this is quite powerful. This is a common trend we read about in the physics article as well

The model of teaching was mentioned in an earlier article that we read about educational debts and how soon students depart from STEM fields. It is interesting to hear that a change in teaching style does not delay time of departure.

I am curious as I get into this paper how this amount of time is quantified. How does the data suggest a difference of two and a half times the course to ensure repayment of educational debts

I see and appreciate how this article is continuing to redefine terms through this framework that all individuals know but may not share the same thought process. I have always struggled with data regarding achievement of students because ideas of achievement differ between groups and communities

I could see how this emphasis could perpetuate a negative ideology about a specific group being analyzed; results published could reinforce negative biases and thoughts that are already held as well

I noticed that while reading this article that our working definition of equity places emphasis and focus on how an individual is behaving in relation to their determined success. It is nice to see this framework again shifts focus and gives power to change o the system and not the student

I do appreciate this mention and clarity; knowing that bias exists and shapes how data is coded and understood in qualitative studies

This is a powerful shift in thought. As opposed to stating results through the students' perspective, results of studies should be presented as a change within the system itself

I have always read articles with the underlying concern that the generalization of whole race statements don't truly pinpoint the lived experience of those within the data set. How do we better capture the intersectionality of a student in relation to perceived success

This is a very curious statement here. Does this claim that while initiatives are drafted and intended to serve the community in a more beneficial way, the practice of them or follow through isn't as focused on fixing the underlying concerns and issues? Only surface level concerns are addressed?

numbers cannot stand alone; they represent a lived experience and therefore cannot be seen without the experience

This is a comment that I knew deep down but needed to be told explicitly. I have been told in several statistics courses that if the p-value does not show significance, then the correlation test or test being conducted shouldn't occur. However, p-values directly relate to sample size. We need to then be questioning why the p-value isn't significant and what does that inform us about the collection of data and methodologies used in the study.

This framework allows for the focus to not be on justifying a claim, but showcasing what happens and how it impacts society and the oppressive systems

This is very true. I see a ton of research comparing "achievement" of students through social, racial, and gender lenses. However, I rarely see research regarding the outcome of finishing university and where students end up in their careers.

I never thought of statistics in this way when it came to quantitative data. However, this is completely true; the value we place on the questions we ask are socially constructed. We ask questions and collect data through statistics and what we ask and how we ask it and who we ask all showcase inequities in society.

Why was this not fact-checked? Was it because the discrepancy showcased an inaccuracy against a minority group? If the inaccuracy was towards White individuals, would this have been caught? Are we wanting the numbers to show us what we, as a society, see? I say this in response to all published data that might not have been fully checked.

Even as a researcher, I find myself believing that the numbers are more concrete and therefore trustworthy compared to qualitative data. However, the numbers derive from lived experiences and therefore cannot be seen without the attachment of the experience of the person they refer to.

Values are always up for interpretation and can be taken inaccurately based on who is reading them and how they are read. Data must be backed and supported by frameworks to showcase what the values mean in context to the society in which they represent.

This is also true! Data is taken in a way to highlights thinking of past research and past processes, most of which were conducted by White elites. I like the example of deficit theories mentioned.

Racism is apparent in all we do as a society. This framework aims at combining quantitative data with CRT in order to demonstrate how data has been taken as a means to perpetuate inequities in society. This is my summary of this principal which is a new term for me this semester.

I remember this incident. When news of this agency's lack of existence came to light, the damage of the false information was already widespread. It truly shows how powerful information can be and how false information can be detrimental even if individuals are told it is false.

What then must be put into place early on as an intervention in order to ensure this educational debt doesn't accrue for students of color

This theory is commonly used when looking at and analyzing achievement of students - very interesting theory

This reflects back to comments made earlier when analyzing the lit review regarding students of bilingualism

I am curious how these measures where standardized and how these concepts were formed as indicators of parenting quality. The one that truly surprised me as an indicator of parenting quality was the TV rules consideration and how use of technology and rules around TV contributed to success of students.

I am unfamiliar with this concept and would like to learn more. What does this equation look like? What is tied to this idea? I feel like it has a large part within the data analysis and I think my analysis will be lacking due to not understanding this measure.

This ties back to our earlier article about educational debt in our school systems and how we can start to make strides towards equaling the debt.

I do think that teachers of all grades should be continually trained in gifted and talented identification and continually work on devising ways in which to enrich the curriculum and learning of all students; noticing trends early could shift an individuals success and shift their academic pathway

Reflecting back on my own upbringing, this conversation of stereotypes within the STEM community has never gone away, only changed. Growing up, the conversation was around shifting the idea of a scientist from a man to a woman and seeing how female identifying scientists have provided great growth to the science community. Now the conversation does need to continue to shift to incorporating the idea that all ethnicities and all demographics can be and should be seen as individuals of science.

I completely agree with this sentiment. We push in middle school or high school for students of all demographics to excel in STEM courses and propose that students pursue STEM careers if they are successful in those courses. However, by the time students are in middle or high school. the achievement and educational debt placed on some students prohibits them from flourishing in these courses which could limit the ability for students to truly pursue careers in these fields. This goes to show that we are trying to "save the day" last minute instead of setting up a structure for all students to excel in all fields early on

This was powerful to see in Figure 3 below.

curious how this altered or shifted their population and sample

This is a needed definition in order to understand the impact of this study and how they viewed the results of the study

I appreciate how this studies tries to capture the lived experience of very specific realities and does not try to lump all identifers within a single group to draw conclusions.

This is an important note for all studies that analyze how race and gender are impacted by and with educational systems

I was noticing in the lit review section that a large focus of prior research was all around teaching techniques and integrating different approaches in order to lower the anxiety of students and strengthen chemistry self-efficacy in all students. However, the lit review did not indicate a clear way in which students were being assessed in their content knowledge and how achievement was being measured.

As someone who studied chemistry in undergrad, I wonder why this is the STEM discipline that sees more female and BIPOC students.

I do like how this paper made sure to include the accurate definitions of how they used each term and where they came from in prior research

I am curious as to which Universities were picked and how they were selected for this study. Did they report higher numbers of students who were from minority groups? Were these urban colleges? rural?

This phrasing is very powerful and could shift the mindsets of educators in schools which could have a ripple effect into higher educational positions and society.

So how do we create change and a more equitable system when one side continually benefits from the other? If someone benefits from the system at hand, what will motivate them to change their way and see the issue in a different light?

It is devastating that these ideas and comments are continually perpetuated throughout generations of teachers.

Generational wealth and generational poverty then play a role in current school funding and educational systems, hence why this is a systemic problem that might not easily be untangled.

I never viewed it this way. When we say the achievement gap, we are focusing on how to catch up students to meet the "standard". However, that means we put on pause the "standard" and hold them up, forcing them to wait for others which in itself isn't equitable for those individuals

I agree that when we discuss the achievement gap, minds go towards test scores and how we grow and change from year to year within a building or school. However, this encompasses a lot more than just the education within the classroom and therefore should be seen as a larger, more complex variable.

Powerful statement here. Just like how we view finances and the economy, we have accumulated debt in terms of educational inequities and disparities across the nation. How can we now pay off the debt we accumulated and make strides towards educaitonal freedom?

This is a great program that forces individuals to look at their own workplace and district to better understand the data and how that data can be misinterpreted for policy making.

I think that this is a good step in order to ensure those in charge are knowledgable in how to interpret and understand this data.

This is a misleading find as being not statistically significant could allude to measures and trends found being due to chance. While it is a unique trend, due to being not statistically significant, the correlation isn't proven and therefore only indicates a unique pattern to continue to observe.

Wonder why there was a cap on students needing services? Were there not enough special education providers? Was the funding for special education too much that programs needed a cap? What happened to students who needed services but were denied services due to this cap?

Why would they want to underreport students with disabilities? What does this do for their district? I wonder why there was underreporting for this Texas district.

While reading this, I can't help but wonder how these processes and systems might be impacted by our current government; will these policies change? will they be eradicated? I wonder what will happen and if disparities will become larger and inequities become more transparent.

It is a perpetuating cycle that keeps individuals within their own circumstances, unable to make vertical movements; a continual system of oppression being done through an "unbiased" model

We've created a way for biases to be allowed for the sake of change and advancement; however, it is still human biases

This is critical to remember as we analyze models or see how models are utilized in reports about healthcare, the education system, the economy, etc.

However, some models, such as that for healthcare, are seen as the comparative standard and are not updated or changed despite new data being reported

I've always been curious to how statistical analysis of one's language, socio-economic status and upbringing can be illegal in one context, but expected in another such as sports

Only those with power and privilege are seen as people with backstories; those that are without privilege are seen as just another data point and number.

This is such a powerful line here. Noticing how powerful data and information is within social circumstances, and taking note of who is being helped verse harmed in these situations, is truly impactful for our society. The example below highlights this narrative perfectly as someone in elected power, only armed with raw numbers, made massive changes within a school system, without even acknowledging contributing factors or seeing the backstory. The numbers are accurate, but they only tell part of the story.