-track day are full of student focused activities, topics and needs madeavailable to all students, both locally and abroad. In fact, each session of the student-track dayinvolved participatory student input throughout the planning process. Some of the topicsdiscussed in the 2022 student-track conference proceedings were a sense of belonging; studentsmental health; full disclosure: speaking your truth student panel; inclusive student leadership andresilience. The student day provided students a platform to discuss equity and inclusion issuesthat impact them every day and develop and/or increase their skills related to equity andinclusion contexts. The day also helped them increase their awareness, recognize the benefits ofa diverse organization
Penn State’s 2016-2020 University-wide Strategic Plan clearly highlightsdiversity as one of its core foundations, the College of Engineering 2020-2025 Strategic Planreaffirmed and clarified this commitment by making one of its unit objectives the integration ofethics, inclusivity, and sustainability into undergraduate programs throughout the college. In theAerospace Engineering Department, senior undergraduate capstone courses offer idealconditions for exploring Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) issues since these classes areteam-based experiential learning environments intended to mirror the engineering workplace.While Penn State’s year-long Aerospace Engineering capstone courses have historically includeda unit on DEI presented at the
-generation category. Weanalyzed survey responses assessing sense of belonging, self-efficacy, and institutionalsupport. The survey explores three dimensions: 1) general belonging, 2) belonging ineducational interactions, and 3) self-efficacy, each with eight items. The survey coversvarious aspects of the institution's student services, including psychological support,academic planning, tutoring, health and well-being services, sports, and supplementary areaslike leadership, diversity, gender, and participatory meetings. It totals 29 items. Respondentsexpressed their views using a 5-point Likert scale, from "strongly agree" to "stronglydisagree." Our findings reveal that all surveyed students exhibit a strong sense of belonging(both in general and
organizations that meet specific thresholds within engineering? What have other organizations used to anoint member institutions that meet a DEI threshold in particular and how else might institutions signal or confirm reaching that bar? How does the ADRP engage with and/or obscure the deepest currents of inequity operating in engineering education? This investigation is important to understand avenues for promoting DEI within postsec- ondary engineering institutions of all kinds, to help ensure that these institutions think critically about what their own campus can/should commit to and how their pledges/plans can disrupt stubborn systems of oppression. It further provides a basis for considering
Good Neighbor Environmental Board (GNEB) that advises the President and Congress of the United States on good neighbor practices along the U.S. border with Mexico. Dr. Santiago’s history of service started in Puerto Rico as Director of the Water Quality Area of the PR Environmental Quality Board, in charge of Compliance, Permit, and Planning Bureau, that included Industrial and Non-Industrial permits, Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs), and watershed restoration activities. As Director, she implemented the first Beach Monitoring program in coordination with the PR Tourism Office and the Blue Flag pro- gram (A world renowned eco-label) and implemented the first Total Maximum Daily Load Program in PR
facultyAbstract In engineering, most contingent faculty positions are held by minoritized groups such asbut not limited to Black, Indigenous, People of Color of all intersecting identities (BIPOCx)representing a missed opportunity to broaden participation. Since many of these professionalsdirectly support minoritized students in fundamental undergraduate courses, it is imperative tounderstand how to professionally develop and mentor these faculty. As part of a National ScienceFoundation Broadening Participation hub called Raíces Institute for Transformative Advocacy(RITA), the authors seek to facilitate a mentoring hub to train, mentor, and equip BIPOCxcontingent faculty to form their own grassroots transformative advocacy plans for
a better understanding of faculty approaches to teaching within the school ofengineering and the related impacts on student learning. We also plan to consult facultythroughout the toolkit development process to co-design a readily adoptable product. We shareour approach as a methodological contribution to toolkit design by aligning espoused advice,best practices, and perspectives from the lived experience of students who are minoritized in thesystem.For the first stage of developing an inclusive teaching toolkit, the authors obtained copies of aninstitutional instructor’s guide that is distributed annually to all engineering faculty. Wereviewed the existing guidelines and contrasted them against high-impact practices related toinclusive
research on workload assess- ment. Dr. Pennathur has also been recently awarded two grants from the National Science Foundation in Engineering Education. In one of the grants, he is modeling how engineering faculty plan for their instruction. In a second grant, he is developing a model for institutional transformation in engineering which balances access and excellence. Dr. Pennathur is the author/co-author of over 100 publications in industrial engineering and human factors engineering. He is on the editorial board of the International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, among other journals.Priyadarshini PennathurProf. Nicholas A Bowman, University of Iowa Nicholas A. Bowman is the Mary Louise Petersen Chair in Higher
tohave this event on FIU’s engineering campus because she had observed that engineering studentsgenerally lack concern for political issues.To carry out this event, JEDI partnered with the FIU Women’s Center. Tinoco met with theirstaff members regularly, and they generously provided guidance on designing the panel andassisted with recruiting attendees. Tinoco also met with Secules intermittently and Bond-Trittipo,Garcia, and Elaouinate weekly from the beginning of the Fall 2022 semester up until the time ofthe event to work on event planning and developing materials to promote the panel.The event was held in October 2022 and included three panelists, a Florida Planned Parenthoodemployee, the faculty advisor for Medical Students for Choice, and
Communitarismo Forming peer-mentoring groups with mentees from other engineering departments so they connect to others in the college of engineering Respeto and Simpatia Modeling respectful yet authentic and safe relationships between TAs, compas, mentees, and faculty/staff Confianza and Planning deliberate, distributed interaction between compas and Personalismo mentees to establish familiarity and promote personal relationships that provide emotional support Familismo Helping mentees build a personal support network Presentismo Empowering compas to adapt the weekly mentoring activities to
mentorship best practices, and topics related toinclusive mentoring. After this training, mentor/mentee introductions were made via email. Forthis program, mentors are asked to meet with their mentee at least once a week for one hour. Thiswas deliberately left open ended so that mentor/mentee pairs could decide what activities anddiscussions would be the most productive for them. We encouraged them to pair up with othermentors/mentee pairs for activities and spent time in the initial mentorship training brainstormingpotential activities with mentors. Although we initially planned to provide mentors with some levelof compensation for their time, this ended up being very difficult to do with the existing grantrequirements (see limitations sections for
helping students engage indiscussions of engineering research’s impact on society. However, we have yet to find anexample of an introductory level course that discusses these topics geared toward theprofessional development of graduate engineering students within a broad range of career andresearch interests. Thus, we sought to develop a course that would help graduate studentresearchers understand the terminology around inequities and justice; interrogate well-knowncases of engineering research across a range of applications, technology, and higher educationbias and discrimination; reflect and discuss how their own research areas impact society; andform a plan for how they may address or actively prevent potential injustices. The course
, Somalia, and Burundi. Ourdata sources include first-person narratives from the youth, equity conjecture maps, and artifactscreated during the program. To answer our research questions, below we share the educational programming(including how it was planned and how it was eventually implemented), observations, artifacts,and researcher notes to share experiences of program implementation and takeaways for futureiterations. As to date there have been a total of four on site visits to the Safari Youth Club, datawill be continuously collected to answer all aspects of our proposed research questions. As ofnow, results from the sessions best support answers to RQ1 and RQ3. This paper and theresearcher observations/notes below are led by
stratification of China’s higher educationsystem is the differentiation between elite and non-elite universities. Elite universities aregenerally sponsored and administered by the Ministry of Education (MoE) or the centralgovernment, while non-elite universities are under the provincial or municipal level ofadministration. The premier status of Chinese elite universities can be best illustrated bythe Double First-Class University (DFCU) Plan[9]. ‘Double’ refers to both university anddiscipline. ‘First-Class’ refers to the objective of reaching the WCU standard. In 2022,there are 301,3 universities in China with only 147 of them (around 4.5%) being includedin the DFCU Plan[10].Thus, the elite universities in this study referred to those in theDFCU plan
that has guided it are potentially useful for other engineeringeducators who seek to create transformative educational opportunities that promote inclusivity,equity, and social justice within the discipline of engineering. The following report first presentsthe developmental context and key foundations upon which the current version of the programhas been structured. Subsequently, a descriptive narrative is offered that includes organization& coordination of the community, opportunities & resources provided to participants, andperceived key benefits of the program based on the developer's perspective. A plan in progressfor additional data collection to steer another stage of research and change implementation isdiscussed. Finally
[3]. This previous work focuses on the how-to parts ofconvening the task force, determining goals, and describing challenges. In this paper, we focuson two specific efforts within the DEI Task Force: a DEI Scholars Program, and a DEI ElectiveOption which is an outcome of the DEI Scholars Program.The DEI Task Force regularly convenes to tackle immediately pressing DEI issues within thedepartment and to develop a longer-term plan for improvement and change for all mattersrelating to DEI [website link]. Every semester the makeup of the DEI Task Force changes as newDEI Scholars join, others graduate, and faculty and staff are added. This evolution of the TaskForce itself has led to an evolution of the type of projects we address and also the way
thematic analysis to determine themes across and within the reflections,responses, discussions, and conference panels [30].Preliminary ResultsThus far, an emergent theme suggests that many of us initially gathered (and continued to gather)because we felt alone and isolated; it was surprising and heartening to discover that we were notalone and that cultivating community with other neurodivergent people was possible inengineering education. Vocal participants reinforced a similar theme in an overflowing panelsession at ASEE 2023. Our initial plan for the session was to split it into panelist stories (60minutes) and synthesis (30 minutes), with an optional ‘futures thinking’ activity at the end if timeallowed. We intended to split the time into
through an onlineteam evaluation tool called CATME, and a diary study where students documented theirreflections on their marginalization by teammates. While data collection and analysis did not, ofcourse, go as the research team had planned, it yielded insights into how frequently minoritizedteammates experience marginalization, instructors’ sense of their responsibility and skill foraddressing such, marginalization, and students’ sense of defeat in hoping for more equitable andsupportive learning environments. The paper describes our data collection processes, analysis,and some choice insights drawn from this multi-year study at a large, research-extensive whiteuniversity.IntroductionTeaching engineering students how to work in teams is
insights into how educatorscan design learning environments using making to support engineering students to (re) negotiatetheir relationships with engineering. Our research questions include: 1. How did the activities in the course support Sarah’s (re)negotiation of her relationships with engineering? 2. How can educators support engineering students’ (re)negotiation of their disciplinary relationships?Our plan is to first interpret the mechanisms of Sarah’s shifting relationships with engineering andunderstand the role that making plays in the mechanism. Our second step is to zoom into detailedmoments in the course where she made (re)negotiations to understand what components ofmaking contributed to those (re)negotiations. Our third
science, and architecture, building and planning. In comparison, femalesdominated undergraduate programs in medicine, veterinary science, and agriculture andrelated subjects. The nature of ET programs having more application-based lab coursesthan traditional engineering may be an influencing factor in these differences.Research [5], [6] seeks to gain an understanding of why there is a higher percentage ofURM students in ET programs than in traditional engineering. These studies look atprevious research and search for insight into the needs of students that are often in theminority. Data indicate that incoming ET URM students are more likely coming fromunder-privileged or underserved urban or rural high schools. It is recommended thatadditional
historical example, create or selectlearning objectives and design exercises to help students identify inequities created byinfrastructure, understand the historical context of that infrastructure, and plan for solutions thataddress the remediation of infrastructure inequities. As the framework is being developed, theauthors are testing its effectiveness and adaptability by creating lessons based on case studies.The framework as well as the lessons created will be available through the CIT-E Canvas page toall interested instructors.IntroductionThe Center for Infrastructure Transformation and Education (CIT-E, pronounced “city”) is acommunity of practice (CoP) for those interested in supporting and improving the scholarship ofinfrastructure education
mirrors a statement in factor 2 in which a participant sawthe value of having different people working together to solve a problem—they both note the benefit ofdiversity of thought. The difference between factors appears to be the way in which a generalized notionof diversity is viewed as related to demographic markers of diversity.DiscussionDiversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) is ubiquitous in the current computer science higher educationclimate, yet definitions vary, as do perspectives regarding what forms of diversity are valued ineducational spaces. As DEI plans become commonplace for securing federal funding [28], understandinghow students, staff and faculty conceptualize the value of diversity will only increase in importance.The Q-sort
Paper ID #42714Equitable Attainment of Engineering Degrees: A Tri-University Study andImprovement EffortKian G. Alavy, The University of Arizona Kian Alavy is Director of Strategic Planning and Initiatives for the Division of Undergraduate Education and a doctoral student in Higher Education at the University of Arizona. Kian is interested in the history and evolution of undergraduate education offices at research universities in the United States, particularly their current nationwide organization around high-impact practices (HIPs). He earned his MA in Middle Eastern and North African Studies at the University of
the lab in Fall quarter—forming relationships with their lab mentor, becoming familiar with the lab research, and developing a research plan for the Winter and Spring Quarters. GEAR students then spend Winter and Spring quarters conducting their research project in the laboratory. • Mentorship: GEAR offers an extensive support system through various levels of mentorship including the GEAR Central Mentor who acts as a bridge between the GEAR students and laboratories, graduate lab mentors who provide regular guidance to the GEAR students, and faculty Principal Investigators (PIs). • Socials and Workshops: GEAR socials and workshops offer opportunities for relaxing, team building, and exploring
engineering and STEM fields in general. This, in turn,creates a more equitable engineering field that can be welcoming and comfortable, andencourage authentic selves while learning and practicing engineering. Studying these perceptionscan potentially identify “features” that have been perpetuating the unwelcoming anduncomfortable environment that makes the participation of LGBTQIA+ engineers difficult.Specifically, this pilot study can contribute to reimagining how the pedagogical and assessmentapproaches in classrooms help with such research by engaging the students to help with thereimagination, which I find to be a knowledge gap in engineering education scholarship. To doso, I plan to conduct a survey based on bell hook’s engaged pedagogy as a
skewed depending on a singular identity. Thisdistribution may also account for higher scores reported by students than professionals, as allstudents attended the same private institution known for having a student body with a highersocioeconomic status. While we accounted for this imbalance by analyzing each identityconstruct and refining the item set, we aim for balance among items in each measured construct.Further adjustments include rephrasing the responses to be true/false (vs. yes/no) to avoidconfusion of items that may result in false positives. We also plan to modify phrasing andremove items (e.g., “I do not have to work to pay for my college education (including workstudy.”) to ensure they are explicit about computing environments to
theperpetuating a culture of exclusion that is rooted in the “traditional” teaching method.As the engineering profession diversifies, the teaching styles need to diversify along with it.Lewis states that the engineering profession is especially biased towards men. Men teach as ifthey are the holder of information, and are transmitting it to students, whereas women thinkstudents should define their own learning experiences. This includes but is not limited toquestions, evaluations of success and teaching styles [10]. Women are also more likely to investtime into planning their courses and designing active learning opportunities which allow studentsto participate and engage in the course material and prioritize higher order thinking skills [11].This is
movement in education,” Curr. Issues Comp. Educ., vol. 25, no. 2, 2023.[4] J. Peloso, “Environmental justice education: Empowering students to become environmental citizens,” Penn GSE Perspect. Urban Educ., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2007.[5] L. Pulido and J. De Lara, “Reimagining ‘justice’in environmental justice: Radical ecologies, decolonial thought, and the Black Radical Tradition,” Environ. Plan. E Nat. Space, vol. 1, no. 1–2, pp. 76–98, 2018.[6] M. L. Miles, A. Schindel, K. S. Haq, and T. Aziz, “Critical examination of environmental justice education: a systemic review.,” Rev., n.d..[7] R. D. Bullard, Dumping in Dixie: Race, class, and environmental quality. Routledge, 2018.[8] D. Schlosberg and L. B. Collins, “From
surveys will be taken to understand how the faculty understand their positionality, what they have learned during their participation in the professional development experience, and how they plan to continue the work beyond the professional development experience. A few faculty will also take part in an interview where they will be asked in greater detail about their experiences in the professional development experience and their viewpoints on the teaching and learning experiences of MS in STEM. To answer the third question, the students of the participating faculty will be asked to complete their course evaluations which will include questions that inform the work of the grant to measure the extent to which their
Paper ID #36943Teamwork Perception in Engineering Programs through the Lens of Genderand RaceDr. Raheleh Miralami, Mississippi State UniversityDr. Saeed Rokooei, Mississippi State University Saeed Rokooei is an assistant professor in the Building Construction Science program at Mississippi State University. His professional responsibilities include project planning and management as well as architectural design practice in private and public construction and engineering firms. He has taught in architecture and construction programs since 2006. Dr. Rokooei’s primary research interests include simulation and serious games