://peer.asee.org/29592.[8] “Project implicit,” https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html.[9] C. Seron, S. S. Silbey, E. Cech, and B. Rubineau, “Persistence is cultural: Professional socialization and the reproduction of sex segregation,” Work and Occupations, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 178–214, 2016.[10] N. Dasgupta, M. M. Scircle, and M. Hunsinger, “Female peers in small work groups enhance women’s motivation, verbal participation, and career aspirations in engineering,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 112, no. 16, pp. 4988–4993, 2015.[11] “CSU Office of Institutional Research, Effectiveness, and Planning,” http://irasp101.ir.colostate.edu:9704/xmlpserver/Public/Reports/RTR_Trends
En- gineering and STEM Education at the University of Texas at Austin. Dr. Borrego is Senior Associaate Editor for Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering. She previously served as Deputy Editor for Journal of Engineering Education, a Program Director at the National Science Foundation, on the board of the American Society for Engineering Education, and as an associate dean and director of in- terdisciplinary graduate programs. Her research awards include U.S. Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE), a National Science Foundation CAREER award, and two outstand- ing publication awards from the American Educational Research Association for her journal articles. All
classroom, faculty encounterstudents through a narrow lens that can hide or spotlight particular identities while stereotypingor simplifying more nuanced experiences. Considering the compelling aspect of inclusion thatpromotes acceptance of people with all their uniqueness [18], we argue engineering cultures thatdo not allow students to bring their whole selves are fundamentally at odds with the idea ofcreating an inclusive environment.A student's well-being depends on a wide range of experiences, including many beyond thebounds of the classroom, such as career prospects, living conditions, financial stability, academicpreparation, social connections, and mentor relationships. Alice's story conveys a broad andcomplex story that intersects her
NIFA grant, and is currently co-PI on three NSF-funded projects in engineering and computer science education, including a Revo- lutionizing Engineering Departments project. She was selected as a National Academy of Education / Spencer Postdoctoral Fellow and a 2018 NSF CAREER awardee in engineering education research. Dr. Svihla studies learning in authentic, real world conditions; this includes a two-strand research program fo- cused on (1) authentic assessment, often aided by interactive technology, and (2) design learning, in which she studies engineers designing devices, scientists designing investigations, teachers designing learning experiences and students designing to learn.Dr. Susannah C. Davis, Oregon
struggles faced by our participants intheir studies and in their efforts to graduate and pursue their professional pathways. Theparticular challenges faced by transfronterizx students in this study included: getting andmaintaining a student visa; struggles to cross the border; limits on professional trajectoriesbecause of citizenship status; and navigating a lack of diversity in career settings. Participantsdescribed overcoming these sociopolitical challenges by persevering through their majors tokeep their immigration status, showing tenacity through internship and job rejections, andfinding resilience to graduate and find a job. In this section, we highlight illustrative examplesof engineering/CS students in navigating these sociopolitical
the interviews over a three-day period in private conference rooms at the high schoolduring the participants’ regularly scheduled science or engineering courses. The teacher, amember of the research team, was aware of which students participated in the interviews,however, to protect participant confidentiality, we did not share any interview data with theteacher until after the semester had ended. Our interview protocol was developed with questionsto collect data about 1) students’ beliefs about the nature of intelligence (i.e., fixed versus growthmindset), 2) science self-efficacy, 3) career aspirations, 4) views on the gender gap in STEM,and 5) students’ beliefs about smartness. In this paper, we focus on the data collected from theportion