There has been a recent call for greater diversity in the field, including in the thematic focus and descriptive representation of working groups. To further these goals, we created a working group focused on the intersection of gender and political participation. Our group is led by two women graduate students and composed of students in different stages of their graduate-school career.
When the pandemic forced everyone online, early-career researchers were not afforded the core opportunities that usually are routine during in-person conferences and workshops. This limited graduate students’ ability to learn how to present their work, to practice giving and receiving feedback, and to build relationships with their peers. Additionally, many of the informal interactions in departmental settings disappeared. These challenges were particularly severe for women, who comprise a disproportionate share of those studying gender and political participation and also may shoulder care responsibilities, because the productivity gap among these women in the discipline widened significantly (Breuning et al. Reference Breuning, Fattore, Ramos and Scalera2021). Strains on productivity as a graduate student are particularly stressful because many students have limited years of funding and thus cannot afford to fall behind on expected progress.
In response, we created the Gender and Political Participation Graduate Working Group to serve as a welcoming and safe space to learn about and engage with the early work of other graduate students. Acknowledging these challenges, we encouraged participants to share their scholarship regardless of how developed or polished it was. This created a more inclusive space and ensured that those who found their time and capacity limited by the emotional and physical challenges of the pandemic could still develop their research. Moreover, we kept our working group’s boundaries as broad as possible to include a diverse array of research, centering it around a topic that usually is overlooked or compressed into a single control variable: gender.
This created a more inclusive space and ensured that those who found their time and capacity limited by the emotional and physical challenges of the pandemic could still develop their research.
Our call for proposals received 43,508 impressions on Twitter. We received 45 submissions from graduate students. The thread’s widespread recognition brought together graduate students from all over the world (e.g., Nigeria, Sweden, and Turkey). Figures 1 and 2 present the subfield and year breakdown of workshop submissions and group members.
Gender and Political Participation Submissions by Field
Gender and Political Participation Members by Year
In selecting participants for our limited number of workshop slots, we ensured that there was a diversity of perspectives included while also offering opportunities to students who were early in their graduate career. The institutional affiliations and stages of the graduate program varied significantly, with more than half of our participants coming from their first, second, or third year. We conducted 12 one-hour workshops. Each workshop included one 30-minute research presentation, followed by 5 to 7 minutes of feedback from a discussant. The remaining time was reserved for audience questions and feedback.
We experienced several positive outcomes and challenges. Our general focus on gender and political participation brought together students from various subfields, which increased cross-subfield knowledge and led to more creative suggestions. The inclusion of those who were in various stages of graduate school provided a low-stakes opportunity for early-career graduate students to learn how to effectively present research, serve as a discussant, and act as a constructive and engaged audience member. For most of our presenters, it was their first time presenting initial work to an audience and/or serving as a discussant. As coordinators, we provided guidance on how to present effectively and how to give direct and efficient feedback. Additionally, for early-career graduate students who at that point had experienced graduate school only online, our workshop offered a consistent community in which they could share ideas and ask questions without the pressure associated with performance, competition, and imposter syndrome that many first-year graduate students experience. During the presentations, we focused on building on one another’s points and positively recognizing and affirming one another’s contributions. We found that this practice, when coupled with a smaller audience size, allowed early-career graduate students to ask questions with more confidence. Along with this welcoming environment, we shared grant and fellowship opportunities that often are part of the “hidden curriculum” in academia and not as familiar to students not from “top” universities. We reassured our participants that they were capable of applying and we demystified the application process by offering advice and support on seemingly difficult funding and fellowship awards.
As a new working group with limited experience, we also had setbacks. Although we offered graduate students in various stages a space for presenting, it sometimes was not enough. Junior graduate students had endured their entire graduate experience via these platforms and sometimes were not able to join meetings due to “Zoom fatigue.” This results from an over-reliance on video-streaming platforms and the excessive amount of close-up eye gaze, cognitive load, increased self-evaluation, and constraints on physical mobility (Bailenson Reference Bailenson2021). Moreover, data infrastructure caused significant connectivity issues for participants in non-Western countries, limiting their ability to join the session. In response, we worked with them to provide alternative solutions, such as written comments submitted via email.
From our experience, we recommend that those who are interested in developing similar workshops for junior scholars—especially workshops that cross subfield boundaries—focus on creating an inclusive and welcoming platform that emphasizes horizontal networking, mentorship, and feedback, as well as intentionally limiting Zoom burnout. This may necessitate incorporating events beyond research presentations that require less of participants, such as networking rounds and informational workshops. We also emphasize the importance of building relationships between early and advanced graduate students, which provide mentorship in areas that graduate students are either uncomfortable asking faculty about or that faculty overlook.
Operating online, during a pandemic, is an ongoing, dynamic process, and our goal is to adapt to the needs and requirements of those we want to assist the most. Moving forward, we plan to avoid burnout and provide opportunities to discuss further the intersections of gender and political participation. We also aim to offer specific workshops on finding and applying for funding, fellowships, and grants. Furthermore, we want to bridge the knowledge gap in the field by bringing in senior scholars on a regular basis to provide participants with advice, tips, and best practices as they move forward in their academic career. Recruiting via Twitter was helpful; however, we will expand our pool of potential participants by reaching out to existing platforms aimed at historically excluded graduate students, including People of Color Also Know Stuff and Women Also Know Stuff (Beaulieu et al. Reference Beaulieu, Boydstun, Brown, Dionne, Gillespie, Klar, Krupnikov, Michelson, Searles and Wolbrecht2017; Casarez Lemi, Osorio, and Rush Reference Lemi, Danielle and Rush2020). We believe that these actions will sustain prolonged engagement and provide graduate students with several resources and opportunities to help them succeed in the academy.
