Clubs can't fix classrooms: Ashoka’s inclusivity needs to take the podium

As of Spring 2026, 0% of the Math Department and ~7% of the Computer Science Department consist of non-cis male faculty members. There are multiple student-facing affirmative action initiatives on campus, focused on gender inclusivity within students. For example, it is a convention to have at least one of the Computer Sciences representatives identify as a non-cis male, as confirmed by Manya Garg, UG25, who currently serves as one of the cs representatives. There also exist initiatives like the Women in Computing Society (WiCS) and the alumni-run Women in STEM Mentorship Program, as well as the ESET Women in Cybersecurity Scholarship. However, one thing that remains lacking is diversity in faculty demographics. The imbalanced gender ratio in STEM departments can, of course, be attributed to the typically skewed gender ratios in these fields across the country, which would make it difficult to hire faculty in a way that does not reinforce cascading male domination. 

Skewed gender ratios are common across STEM departments in universities and are not unique to Ashoka. This suggests that these patterns are shaped by broader structural factors rather than being solely the result of decisions within Ashoka’s departments. However, I argue that the impact of these skewed ratios must still be examined within Ashoka’s context. We see this impact in classroom culture and participation, other events on campus focused in these areas and in who ultimately persists in STEM spaces on campus. 

To understand these outcomes more fully, it is useful to look at the issue from two angles: one is the experiences of non-cis male faculty in these departments themselves. Second, is the impact this has on the student cohort. Is there an upper bound to the impact student initiatives can have due to the lack of mentors available on campus? In many ways, yes. Student-led spaces can build community and offer support, but they can’t replace the role faculty play in shaping academic paths, mentoring students, and opening up opportunities. When almost every course in a STEM department is taught by a cis-man, and most visible scholars fit the same stereotype, these initiatives start to feel like they’re working around a gap rather than actually closing it. This article, being written from a student’s perspective, will focus primarily on the latter. 

First, most classes being taught by non-cis men measurably makes an impact on classroom culture. “Your confidence to speak in a class is greatly impacted by whether you’re a male or non-cis male,” says Roshni Agarwal, UG25. “My male peers would answer questions wrong with confidence, but I’ve heard every woman preface her answer with ‘I’m not sure if this is right.” 

This oftentimes leads to a self perpetuating cycle. Gender minorities are hesitant to speak up and engage less with course content, which leads to their learning being hindered. While participation is not the sole determinant of learning, sustained lower engagement can, over time, affect both conceptual clarity and confidence with the material. This in turn leads to low performance in comparison to their male counterparts. With low performance, it can reinforce the idea of non-cis men being less competent in their respective fields and lead to them moving away from them. Additionally, because there is a hindrance in learning and consequently low performance, they are also less likely to be considered for opportunities and leadership positions, which continues to make these spaces male dominated. Research conducted at Princeton University shows that while men are much more likely to speak in engineering classes, when classes are taught by women instructors, the gender gap for the same practically disappears. Another research study published in the National Library of Medicine shows similar results, stating that female in-class participation and performance increase with an increase in female peers and/or a female instructor. This phenomenon is often referred to as the leaky pipeline. It notes that at each stage of their academic and professional careers, there are fewer and fewer non cis-men in STEM fields.

Secondly, the lack of non-cis male faculty also impacts activities outside the classroom. Organisations like the Women in Computing Society (WiCS) are largely seen calling in speakers from outside campus. In 2025, WiCSCON , an annual conference hosted by WiCS that invites mainly non-cis male speakers, did not have a single faculty member participate — something unsurprising, given that there are very few faculty members on campus who would fulfill the criterion.This reliance on external speakers and role models shifts the burden of forcing representation within these spaces away from Ashoka as an institution. As a result, there is a lack of sustained mentorship and visible role models and institutional advocacy on campus. ​​These gaps shape student participation beyond academic coursework and extracurricular activities and move into long term STEM participation, tying into the leaky pipeline phenomenon. A lack of non cis men faculty can result in a lower number of non cis men enrolling in STEM undergraduate classes and consequently in higher education programs, as evidenced by research presented in The Economics of Education Review. 

Together, these patterns suggest that while Ashoka has initiatives on campus that focus on increasing student enrolment and limiting biased outcomes within STEM departments, the impact of these initiatives is limited without institutional representation, which cannot exist without a stronger and more continuous presence of non-cis male faculty. That presence is crucial in shaping students’ everyday academic experiences and defining who participates and continues in these fields. Ultimately, student-facing efforts cannot be a substitute for the presence of diverse faculty within the departments that students engage with everyday. 

(Edited by Avika Mantri and Madiha Tariq)