Tolúwalàse Akanbi-Akinlolu (King’s College London)

As physics education researchers, we frequently analyse data on belonging, attainment, and participation, often comparing outcomes across demographic groups, men and women, white students and minority ethnic students.

At the 2024 ViCEPHEC conference, I listened to a presentation reporting that women were more likely to achieve a first-class degree, while Black students were less likely to do so. Sitting in the audience as a Black woman, I found myself asking a simple question:

Where do I appear in these statistics?

If women as a group are performing well, and Black students as a group are underperforming, what does this mean for those who belong to both groups? How likely was I, as both Black and a woman, to achieve a first?

Too often in our research, the category “women” implicitly means “white women,” while ethnicity data tends to focus on men by default. As a result, individuals who sit at the intersection of multiple identities can become statistically invisible.

This is where intersectionality becomes crucial.

Coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989, intersectionality emerged from Black feminist scholarship to describe how overlapping social identities such as race, gender, and class   interact to shape lived experiences. The framework was initially developed to highlight how Black women’s experiences were often erased within both feminist movements and racial justice activism. Since then, intersectionality has been widely adopted within education research as both a theoretical lens and a methodological approach.

What does an intersectional lens mean for PER?

Applying intersectionality in physics education research requires us to rethink how we design studies, engage with participants, and interpret data.

Research questions are not additive

A common misconception is that intersectionality simply means adding demographic variables together. However, asking separately about “women’s experiences” and “Black students’ experiences” does not automatically capture the experiences of Black women.

Intersectional research instead focuses on holistic lived experiences. It recognises that identities do not operate independently; they interact in ways that produce unique experiences that cannot be understood through single-category analyses.

This shift has important implications for how we construct interview questions. Rather than separating identities, researchers are encouraged to invite participants to reflect on how their identities intersect in shaping their experiences within physics.

Sampling requires intentionality

Physics education research often prioritises representative sampling. However, when studying marginalised groups, representativeness can inadvertently lead to exclusion.

Intersectional research therefore often involves intentional sampling strategies, such as oversampling underrepresented groups, designing inclusion criteria around specific identity intersections, and using qualitative approaches that prioritise depth over generalisation.

Crucially, a small number of participants does not diminish the importance of their experiences. Even when only a few individuals represent a particular identity intersection, their perspectives remain vital for understanding systemic inequities.

Reflexivity is central

Intersectional research also requires researchers to reflect critically on their own positionality.

Researchers are not detached observers. Our identities, assumptions, and social positions shape how we interpret participants’ experiences. Intersectional scholars emphasise the importance of understanding participants within their broader sociohistorical contexts and recognising how power dynamics operate within research relationships.

This has practical implications for research design. Researchers must consider how their presence may influence what participants feel able to share, particularly when working with marginalised groups. In some cases, this may involve prioritising focus group facilitators who share aspects of participants’ lived experiences, or who are trained to navigate sensitive identity-related discussions.

Creating safe and inclusive research environments where participants feel comfortable speaking openly  is therefore a key component of intersectional practice.

Data disaggregation reveals hidden patterns

Finally, intersectionality challenges how we present and interpret demographic data.

In many education reports, whiteness functions as an implicit benchmark, while categories such as “BME” or “BAME” group together populations with very different experiences. This can obscure important disparities.

Disaggregating data by intersecting identities – for example, examining outcomes for Black women specifically – allows researchers to uncover patterns that would otherwise remain hidden.

At the same time, intersectional scholars caution that no categorisation system can fully capture the complexity of lived experience. Combining disaggregated data with qualitative narratives can help preserve the richness of participants’ stories.

Looking forward

Intersectionality is not simply about adding more demographic categories to our datasets. It fundamentally challenges how we conceptualise equity, representation, and inclusion within physics education.

By adopting an intersectional lens, PER researchers can design more inclusive research questions, better understand the diversity of student experiences, avoid oversimplified interpretations of attainment gaps, and develop interventions that address the needs of those most marginalised.

Ultimately, intersectionality encourages us to ask not just who is underrepresented in physics, but whose experiences remain unseen within our research.

For me, intersectionality is not just a theoretical framework: it is a reminder that behind every dataset are individuals whose experiences cannot be reduced to a single category.

Recommended Reading

For readers interested in learning more about intersectionality in research and education:

• Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex.
  The foundational paper introducing the concept of intersectionality.
• Davis, K. (2014). Intersectionality as Critical Methodology.
  A key overview of how intersectionality functions as a research approach.
• Bowleg, L. (2018). When Black + Lesbian + Woman ≠ Black Lesbian Woman: The Methodological Challenges of Qualitative Intersectional Research.
  Practical guidance on designing and conducting intersectional studies.
• Rainey et al. (2016). Race and Gender Differences in How Sense of Belonging Influences Decisions to Major in STEM.
  A landmark PER-relevant study demonstrating intersectional patterns in STEM participation.