Representation on Our Terms: How Trans and Gender Diverse People Prioritize Inclusivity in University Information Systems

Paper Title

Representation on Our Terms: How Trans and Gender Diverse People Prioritize Inclusivity in University Information Systems

Publication Info

• Topic area: Inclusivity for gender diverse individuals in university information systems
• Keywords: gender inclusivity, university systems, trans and nonbinary, back-end systems, user interfaces, data reporting, Queer HCI, identity representation, organizational constraints, participatory design

Background and Problem

• Problem / challenge: Current university information systems inadequately represent gender diverse individuals, often prioritizing binary frameworks due to technical, regulatory, and resource constraints. Prior research has focused on user-facing inclusivity but neglected back-end systems and external reporting dynamics.
• Significance: Addressing these gaps is crucial for reducing misgendering, fostering inclusivity, and ensuring that gender diverse individuals are accurately represented in organizational systems that influence their daily lives and institutional interactions.
• Motivation and related work: Previous studies have documented exclusionary practices in digital systems and proposed inclusive design strategies, but these have largely centered on individual systems or front-end interfaces. This paper builds on Queer HCI and infrastructure studies to explore how gender diverse individuals prioritize inclusivity across interconnected organizational systems.

Solution

• Proposed approach: A pragmatic model of inclusivity that balances user-facing and back-end inclusivity, incorporates user agency in data reporting, and aligns organizational practices with community values under regulatory constraints.
• Novelty:
  1. Empirical investigation of gender diverse individuals’ preferences for representation in university systems.
  2. Identification of acceptable trade-offs, such as prioritizing back-end accuracy over user-facing inclusivity in certain contexts.
  3. Insights into the importance of user agency in data aggregation and reporting.
  4. Development of a staged, participatory approach to inclusivity that integrates technical, regulatory, and community considerations.
• Procedure and key techniques:
  • Conducted 23 semi-structured interviews with gender diverse individuals affiliated with a Midwestern U.S. university.
  • Analyzed data using a multi-cycle, inductive coding process to identify themes related to user-facing and back-end inclusivity, data reporting preferences, and goals for ideal systems.
  • Synthesized findings into actionable insights for designing inclusive organizational systems.

Results

• Concrete findings:
  • 18 participants discussed preferences for inclusivity: 7 prioritized user-facing changes, 5 emphasized back-end inclusivity, and 6 advocated for coordinated efforts.
  • Participants favored community-based umbrella terms (e.g., trans, nonbinary) for data aggregation but stressed the need for user agency and context-sensitive reporting.
  • Many participants called for eliminating or minimizing gender data collection unless absolutely necessary.
  • Participants desired transparency, consent, and robust privacy safeguards in data practices.
• Advantage over baselines:
  • Highlights the importance of back-end inclusivity as foundational for durable representation, addressing gaps in prior work focused on user interfaces.
  • Provides actionable strategies for balancing inclusivity with regulatory and technical constraints.
• Experiments / evaluation:
  • Interviews with 23 participants (mean age = 31) representing diverse roles (students, staff, faculty, alumni) and disciplines.
  • Thematic analysis identified key trade-offs and priorities for inclusivity in university systems.
• Limitations and future work:
  • Findings are specific to a single university and may not generalize to other contexts or populations.
  • Future research should explore inclusivity in diverse organizational and geographic settings, as well as the broader sociopolitical implications of data practices.

Summary

This study investigates how trans and gender diverse individuals prioritize inclusivity in university information systems, revealing preferences for back-end accuracy, user agency in data reporting, and coordinated front-end and back-end efforts. Participants emphasized the importance of transparency, privacy, and minimizing harm while navigating regulatory and technical constraints. The findings highlight a need for pragmatic, staged approaches to inclusivity that align organizational practices with community values. These insights extend Queer HCI to organizational infrastructures and offer transferable strategies for inclusivity in other compliance-driven domains.