improve the field’s diversity, adaptability, and competitiveness, the Year of Impact on Racial Equity is focused on creating organizational change to address the culture, policies, and racial and ethnic representation within engineering student organizations, colleges of engineering, and pre-college outreach efforts. These 12 months will move us beyond action to focus on the impact of the actions we take. We expect that actions in these domains will result in three concrete forms of impact: (1) empowered engineering student organizations, which will make engineering education more inclusive at the level of peer-to-peer interactions; (2) actionable organizational policies and effective practices
students.BackgroundIt is well established that teaching undergraduate students, particularly engineering students, howto work in teams is important [7], [8], difficult [9], and worth doing because students canimprove [10]. Teamwork assessment tools like CATME (a web-based peer evaluation tool foundat catme.org) can help instructors identify teaming problems amongst students [11], [12].Challenges remain, however, for instructors of large courses who want to address such problemsin getting enough of the right kind of information to effectively intervene to help studentsimprove their teamwork skills, and then knowing how best to coach teams exhibiting evidence ofdysfunction.Researchers have established the outsized burden that minoritized teammates carry
exclusionary learning environments and curricula, lack of facultymentorship and role models, and lack of a supportive peer group (see [4]-[6] research findings onthese topics). For these reasons, there is a steep decline in the number of Black and Hispanicstudents graduating with a STEM degree from Baccalaureate institutions [7]. Classroom culture is shown to have a significant impact on the success of Black andHispanic students in higher education and in STEM in particular. Specifically, when Black andHispanic students feel like they have learning and supportive spaces to develop their STEMidentities, they are more likely than their peers who do not have access to such spaces toacademic persist in the STEM field [8]. However, Black and
? Concepts Question 2: What do you think about the examples Effectiveness of Peer Collaboration and solved in class collectively as group? Engagement Question 3: What is your opinion on the instructor Increased Understanding and Confidence using visual supplements when solving problems? Question 4: What do you think about the rigor of Embracing the Challenge and Valuing this course compared to others? Rigor Question 5: What did this class teach you about Increased Knowledge of Dynamic Nature Engineering? of EngineeringCollectively, the themes that emerged in the study provide insight into students’ experiences withthe approaches and technique implemented by the
by the National Science Foundation Award No. HRD-1911375Introduction In this study, we interviewed 33 mentors and minority protégés participating in the LouisStokes Alliance for Minority Participation (LSAMP) program in Science, Technology,Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) across four different universities within a statewideuniversity system, in the United States of America, to learn the following regarding mentoringrelationships for minority STEM students: (1) how students respond to ideas and projects, (2)how students conquer challenges and respond to setbacks, (3) how students set and pursue theiracademic goals, (4) how students describe their undergraduate research mentoring relationshipwith peers and professors, (5) how
major for her. In engineering, where the cultural perspective is that a stereotypical student is white and male, students often have the unconscious bias that gives white, male students the benefit of the doubt, assuming they are smart and experienced. Socially, Black and brown women are stereotyped as angry or loud. Jamie’s awareness of this stereotype makes her think twice about speaking up. Additionally, disciplinary power also makes her reconsider speaking up— engineering courses are built on teamwork. If she were to speak up and was not supported by her peers because they did not notice anything happening, and her professor mentioned that she should just learn to deal with team dynamics, she
relevant to the coursetopic but focus discussion on societal impact.Nevertheless, implementing social justice into courses and curriculum cannot be done in avacuum. The classroom climate can dictate whether these changes will be successful or not.There are some strategies that can help in cultivating the environment necessary for productiveengagement with social justice concepts. Inclusive teaching practices can set the tone forconversations about ARDEI in the classroom. Incorporating strategies such as Universal Designfor Learning (UDL), diverse perspectives and course materials, and peer learning activities helpmake the classroom climate accessible to all learners [24]. In addition, having instructorsreflecting on their own identities and biases
spacesParticipants discussed experiencing exclusionary and harmful encounters and practices in STEMhigher education and entrepreneurial spaces. Dr. Wu noted, “As a woman, as a minority, there'salways so many different challenges that's there. It's always there, it’s always there.” One ofthese challenges was not having access to supportive interpersonal relationships in theiruniversities and academic departments. Dr. J remarked, “I came to [university] recognizing that no one's going to help you, Dr. J, so you'd better write the papers, and you'd better write the proposal. That's exactly what I did, I wrote the papers. I wrote the proposals. I was the PI. I was the first author on most of my papers. People were not saying, "Oh Dr. J
) 5. Synthesize and Integrate the Best Evidence into a Joint Position: The four members of the group drop all advocacy to synthesize and integrate what they learned. Each group creates a synthesis of what is now known; our experience is that they do not have difficulty with this, possibly because of the dual perspectives they have taken. They summarize a joint position to which both sides agreed. Subsequently, they (a) prepare a cooperative report with each member of the group selecting a topic supporting the synthesis and writing a paragraph supported by the research; (b) combine their paragraphs into a single paper and refine the flow of the paper; (c) present their conclusions to the class
, participants learn about and gain access to resources that are explicitly DEI-related: they mobilize resources to advance equity at the institutional level as an outcome of theprojects and collaborate on additional projects to embed DEI into the process of change-makingitself, starting from the initial stages of writing a proposal. Secondly, the way participants engagewith each other, and approach change goals puts equity and inclusion into practice: participantsidentify and tackle structural barriers to change through DEI-aligned behaviors, from addressinghow institutional circumstances create resistance to DEI, to developing a shared vision forsystemic change that is inclusive and collaborative.IntroductionWe draw on resource mobilization theory and
universities.RedShirt programs are one example of this type of asset-based student support program aimed atbroadening participation in engineering for students from minoritized racial or ethnic backgrounds orfrom under-resourced high schools and geographic regions (Myers et al., 2018). RedShirt programsprovide an alternative admissions pathway for students who do not meet traditional admissions criteriafor highly selective engineering colleges, but still have the desire and potential to be an engineer.RedShirt programs focus on building strong peer networks and communities to support academicsuccess, communities that are initiated through required summer bridge experiences and reinforcedthrough “high-touch” advising, study sessions, and targeted coursework
. The ROLE program at the HSI supports engineeringsophomore, junior, and senior-level students in developing research skills needed in technicalfields; interpersonal skills needed to be successful employees; and academic and professionalskills that are transferable in their decisions to enter graduate studies or the professional world.ROLE students learn technical skills through hands-on activities in a laboratory setting; receivenear-peer and faculty mentorship from individuals with similar cultural and linguisticbackgrounds; attend culturally relevant workshops that support academic, interpersonal, andprofessional growth; and participate in outreach events within the local community and K-12school environments. This study will work
youth.Our project’s focus on strengthening belonging through the use of youth participatory actionresearch (YPAR) in technology-rich spaces to develop deliverables iteratively, cater to theserecommendations. As shown technology and makerspaces provide opportunities to create physical artifactsthat build personal connections with engineering and technology [10], [11], [12], [13]. Howeverthere have been unequitable uses of said spaces and resources for youth from underservedcommunities that place youth at a disadvantage compared to their more privileged peers [1],[14], [15], [16]. Therefore the use of YPAR in technology rich spaces, youth may use researchmethods to make sense of and address social problems impacting their communities [17
) feminism of their day, the Combahee River Collectivehighlighted intersectional politics and activism within a framework of solidarity. Through the1980s, writers such as Audre Lorde and Patricia Hill Collins highlighted the multitude of waysthat intersecting identities gave rise to unique, interlocking, and intersectional forms ofoppression [14], [15]. These writings brought intersectionality to the center of activist thought,challenging the previously single-issue politics of groups such as the civil rights movement, thegay/lesbian liberation movement, and second-wave feminism. Since its roots in activist politics and articulation by Crenshaw, intersectionality has madeits way into a wide array of disciplines. Packaged as a tenet in
extended to similarly innate forms of neurodivergence, thusly: bysituating similarly these forms of neurodivergence as something one can ‘have,’ person-firstlanguage perpetuates the idea that neurodivergence can always be separated from the self – andtherefore removed or ‘cured.’Steps towards the neurodiversity paradigmThe earliest instance of neurodiv* term use I found in the EER literature was in an articlepublished in 2015, three years after Walker first introduced the neurodiversity paradigm inpublished writing [2] and one year after she first posted “Neurodiversity: Some Basic Terms &Definitions” online [6]. Though all analyzed articles were published after these important works,none directly referenced Walker, and none were entirely
engage the students in theideas of the articles, we provided students with three reading questions that they would respondto before coming to class. The questions are listed below: 1. What do you want to know more about regarding air pollution exposure across race and poverty level? What questions do you have? 2. How might past policies and events help you make more sense of the paper's findings? 3. As the study’s authors write: “A focus on poverty to the exclusion of race may be insufficient to meet the needs of all burdened populations.” The researchers found that even after accounting for poverty, they saw differential impacts based on race. Why do you think it is important to separate out race and poverty level and
teaches courses and conducts research related to Thermodynamics, engineering and public policy, engineering education, and gender in engineering and science. She is the co-author on an engineering textbook, Fundamentals of Engineering Thermodynamics, which is used worldwide in over 250 institutions and she is an author on over 95 peer- reviewed publications.Caroline SolomonDr. Elizabeth Litzler, University of Washington Elizabeth Litzler, Ph.D., is the director of the University of Washington Center for Evaluation and Re- search for STEM Equity (UW CERSE) and an affiliate assistant professor of sociology. She has been at UW working on STEM Equity issues for more than 17 years. Dr. Litzler is a member of ASEE, 2020-2021
inequity in STEM, and indenying the existence of the challenges women in STEM are forced to navigate, men reifyexisting gender disparities [40] For example, in their study of over 700 participants in which30% of respondents were faculty, Handley et al. [40] found that men were less receptive toscholarship that examines gender bias in STEM than their women peers. The failure of the majority of men to acknowledge the well-documented issue of genderinequity in STEM makes men allies all the more important [40]. Although allies may not be ableto affect the beliefs of all men, they may be able to influence some colleagues – both women andmen. In the case of supporting women, the efforts of a man ally may support a woman’sretention in a STEM
as important as content knowledge,” we refer to a practice as an intentionalbehavior with specific meaning within a community. In addition to easing the burden oneducators trying to inspire the next generation of engineers, these strategies are based on bestknown practices to 1) retain students as populations across the United States decrease and changedemographically, and 2) to graduate engineers ready to tackle incredibly complex socialproblems.During this formative time in engineering education, the curriculum, interactions with facultyand peers, and course options give students insight into which skills are necessary and which aresupposedly optional for practicing engineers. Berdanier [11] makes it clear the “optional” skillsoften are
accounts for the differences?Literature ReviewLiterature was identified by searching various databases (Web of Science Core Collection, Webof Science Inspec, and ASEE Peer) for keywords, which included “disparities”, “academia”,“women”, “engineering”, “inequities”, and “gender”. The identified records were screened forrelevance, availability, and duplicates. In total, 110 papers were selected to be analyzed from allareas of academia in a full-text analysis. 30 papers were disqualified after review for not fittingthe scope of the study. Some of those reasons included a focus on undergraduate students and afocus on women in engineering in the industry. 18 papers focused on engineering and wereanalyzed to identify disparities for women, the causes of
interests [12]. Thissignificantly impedes the sense of belonging of non-traditional learners and those whosepreferred communication mode is other than reading and writing. The purpose of this project wasto support engineering instructors in redesigning their courses to support and engage a broaderrange of neurological and cognitive functioning within students to support and promoteparticipation of non-traditional thinkers and problem solvers in the engineering fields. Thepurpose of this study was to investigate instructors’ conceptions of neurodiversity to provideinsight on the effects of the professional development on instructors. Additionally, it follows thatinstructors' views about neurodiversity affect the ways in which they support (or do not
the thought policing.This participant seemed in conflict with the ideas that were presented during thevignette-based HC survey and expressed frustration. He thinks that women do not gointo engineering only because they choose not to, which is related to the first conceptionthat systemic discrimination (a form of HC) is not an issue, yet the experiences andstatistics of marginalized individuals in engineering argue otherwise. The participantdoes not account for gender stereotypes and influences that impact women’s choices togo into engineering, such as the influence of family, peer groups, and societal/culturalgender stereotypes on the attraction of adolescent boys to STEM-related subjects andemphasis on their performance [48]. The participant
characteristics that they believe are representative of anengineering educator. This adoption and emulation of attitudes, behaviors and practices – in allforms of linguistic and symbolic units – serve the purpose of being recognized as engineeringeducators by peers, mentors, professors, and those who are part of the world of engineering [38,39]. Thus, we posit that current discourses and practices of doctoral engineering students in theclassroom, as they engage in teaching, are a representation of the current culture of engineering.That is, doctoral engineering students enact overt and subtle behaviors learned and adopted inengineering spaces throughout their undergraduate and doctoral programs such as a sense ofsuperiority in their ability to solve
-specific needs as they worked the project (as ofthis writing, a third and fourth cohort, each consisting of 7 states, are engaging in the CMP).States vary in data capacity and in policy structure (see Tab. 1). For example, most of the cohort1 states have a decentralized model where curricular and course decisions are made at the districtor school level with little influence from the state. In cohort 2, most of the states operate within atop-down approach where curriculum and graduation requirements are set at the state level.Table 1: State data capacity at baselineState features (at baseline) Cohort 1 Cohort 2 (n=6
Education, 2023 Work In Progress: A Novel Approach to Understanding Perceptions of Race Among Computing UndergraduatesINTRODUCTIONBlack, Native American, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and Latinx undergraduates remainseverely underrepresented in computing [i.e., computer science (CS), engineering, andinformation systems] [1]. This is often attributed to student-centered, deficit-based factors suchas a lack of access to K-12 computing courses, culturally relevant role models and curricula, andsense of belonging. However, research notes how racial “othering” in university courses,departments, and cultures from peers, faculty, and staff negatively impact them [2]–[4].Shifting national conversations around race, racism, and anti
, etc.) arerelevant to a broad range of sectors and organizational forms.2.1 Reporting in CompaniesReporting to managers, who themselves report to more senior managers, takes place within aformal, bureaucratic structure of work. Summarizing social theorist Max Weber’s classicconcepts of bureaucratic organizations, Gorman and Mosseri [2] write: In the prototypical bureaucratic organization, work is divided into well‐defined, nonoverlapping jobs that remain fixed for substantial periods of time. The performance of work is governed by written rules specifying the appropriate way to handle different categories of situations, so that workers' individual discretion is limited. Each role reports to a superior one in a