Conference Session

Focus on Faculty

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Keisha Walters, Mississippi State University; Soumya Srivastava, Mississippi State University; Adrienne Minerick, Mississippi State University; Jacqueline Hall, Mississippi State University; Kaela Leonard, Michigan Technological University; Amy Parker, Mississippi State University; Heather Thomas, Mississippi State University

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

ratings of importance do not track the rankings precisely, but still demonstrate thatthe students viewed all topics as beneficial. Page 15.753.14 Figure 1: Average student s Likerrt ratings forr identical prre- (pixeled, grey shorterr columns) and apost-courrse (red talleer columns) assessment a q

Conference Session

ADVANCE Grants and Institutional Transformation

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Anna M. Zajicek, University of Arkansas; Shauna A. Morimoto, University of Arkansas; Joseph Rencis, University of Arkansas; Valerie H. Hunt, University of Arkansas

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

, Ward12 notes that “[q]ualified women applicants are not given theopportunity to become engineering faculty because it is presumed that women will not have thetime to serve as effective members of the professoriate given their family obligations.” Womenwho do join the faculty ranks experience “bias, lack of professionalism shown toward womenfaculty […], visibility/invisibility, patronization, faculty spouse issues, and other women notacknowledging women engineers.”13 The prevalent cultural norm “assumes a work week of morethan fifty hours a week, which continues to exclude women who have child care obligations,”12further hampering the advancement of women faculty.Over the years, research showing the effects of the institutional culture and