Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division: Retention of Undergraduate Students

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Whitney Winders; Cariana Cornel; Caralea Cornel, Brigham Young University; Allie Larson; Sarah A. Cunha; Samuel Moses, Brigham Young University; Dale C. Rowe, Brigham Young University; Laura Wilkinson, Brigham Young University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

effect of significance has been an increase in direct, targeted recruitmentof women into the program — and subsequently from the program by employers. Weanecdotally note also that women in cybersecurity command a higher average placement wagethan men, although regret that to date, this data is not statistically significant due to insufficientdata samples.IntroductionAt the beginning of 2015, Intel announced a $300 million diversity initiative intended to give fullrepresentation to women within their company by 2020 3. Intel stated that its plan is to “hiredifferently and tie executive pay to performance on the issue 4.” Full representation in thiscontext means that Intel’s aims to reflect the amount of women who have the skills and aptitudeto

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Pre-college Programs for Women

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jenni Buckley, University of Delaware; Amy Trauth, University of Delaware; Laura Meszaros Dearolf, The Perry Initiative ; Amy C Bucha, The Perry Initiative; Lisa L Lattanza MD, University of California San Francisco

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Pre-College Engineering Education Division, Women in Engineering

to 5-pt Likert Scale. Whiskers represent ±1 standard deviation.Table 1: College majors for program alumnae and controls for both high school (intended major)and college (actual major). Students were permitted multiple responses to reflect dual majors andinterdisciplinary areas of study. Choice of college major was compared between alumnae andcontrols using chi-square test for independence (df=1, N=627 for high school, N=324 forcollege). High School CollegeCollge Major Program Control p value Program Control p valuePhysics, Chemistry, Math 29.4% 30.8% 0.68 7.3% 8.3% 0.86Biology or Biosciences 80.8

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Technical Session

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Samuel Alberto Acuna, University of Wisconsin - Madison; Joseph E Michaelis, University of Wisconsin - Madison; Joshua Daniel Roth, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Joseph Towles, University of Wisconsin, Madison

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

activitieshad a higher interest in engineering than girls. This study also showed that biomechanics-basedactivities could increase interest in considering careers in engineering, regardless of initial interest.Of note, when both boys and girls had little to no interest in engineering, boys were more easilydrawn in by the outreach activities than girls. The challenge with engaging girls in engineeringmay be a reflection of intrinsic differences such as gender stereotypes (Bieg et al., 2015), andpsychological factors (Stoet et al., 2016) between boys and girls that are more pronounced at lowindividual-interest levels. Thus, it may be necessary to tailor interventions (e.g., biomechanics-based activities) that target girls with low interest in engineering

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 4

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Angela M Kelly, Stony Brook University; Doreen Aveni, Stony Brook University; Monica Bugallo, Stony Brook University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

of belonging, self-efficacy). By providing studentswith honors level academic coursework, coupled with real world skills development, such asresearch and design projects, and practical leadership experiences, WISE Honors will positionstudents to become effective agents in science and engineering communities. Future researchwill explore longitudinal impacts of program participation, and how students might be betterprepared to balance the demands of their personal and professional lives.AcknowledgmentsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1647405. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 4

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Stephany Coffman-Wolph, University of Texas, Austin; Kimberlyn Gray, West Virginia University Inst. of Tech.

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

students are much more likely to seekout tutoring. The authors believe that female students are more likely to think that they either“have what it takes” or not and this will be reflected in their grades. The data shows that femalefirst generation students are also not joining programs like TRIO (aimed specifically to help firstgeneration students), which the authors believe is a contributing factor to these students avoidingSTEM fields. The male students were more likely to be members of STEM organizations andother support programs on campus, which may be why they feel a much lower need ofmentoring. Increasing peer and faculty mentoring for our female students as well as encouragingthem to join STEM organizations may help fill some of these

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 4

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Yang Yang, Kansas State University; Bette Grauer PE, Kansas State University; Jennifer Renee Thornburg, Kansas State University; Amy Rachel Betz, Kansas State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

.926, indicating high internal consistency of the measure. Allsurvey items were on a 5-point Likert scale (5 = Always, 4 = Most of the time, 3 = Sometimes, 2= Rarely, 1 = Never) with higher values demonstrating more effective tutoring behaviors orcharacteristics. We calculated the average score of the eleven items to reflect how effective atutor is as perceived by students.To address the second research question whether male and female SAS tutors were perceiveddifferently in their effectiveness by students who attended SAS tutoring sessions, we coded thesex of each tutor (0 = Male, 1 = Female). There were 10 female tutors and 11 male tutors. Thedata of students who visited the SAS program were recorded electronically by Academic

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 5

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Diane L Peters P.E., Kettering University; Maryam Darbeheshti, University of Colorado Denver; Gloria Guohua Ma, Wentworth Institute of Technology; Karinna M Vernaza, Gannon University; Alexa N. Rihana Abdallah, University of Detroit Mercy; Christina Remucal, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Stephanie G Wettstein, Montana State University; MEERC

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

Research, and waslaunched in December 2019. As of the writing of this draft, 11 valid responses have beenreceived; it is anticipated that additional responses will be received, hence, this is a Work inProgress.The survey was developed based on the goals of the study, with several rounds of review andrevision to ensure that the questions would be interpreted as intended. Questions were alsodesigned to align with an earlier survey of the faculty advisors, in order to provide a basis forcomparison. Further details on the development of those questions are given in [2]. Survey datawere analyzed using standard statistical methods. The written reflections were analyzed usingopen coding, in order to allow themes to emerge.ResultsOut of the initial

Conference Session

The Impact of Curriculum on the Retention of Women Students

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

David Keathly, University of North Texas; Robert Akl, University of North Texas; Ryan Garlick, University of North Texas

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

investigators conducted a post camp survey polling both parents and students todetermine the long term educational and career plans for each participant, as well as the impactof their camp experience and interest in future activities of a similar nature. The results from theexit surveys are further reinforced by this data, which shows that camp experiences resulted inmore deep-seated influence on school performance and interest after an “incubation” period ofsix months or more in which to absorb and reflect on the knowledge and skills obtained duringRobocamp. Table 4 illustrates the student responses to selected questions on the post campsurvey, and Table 5 indicates responses from the parent survey.The student responses illustrated in Table 4 are

Conference Session

K-12 Programs (Co-sponsored by K-12 Division)

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Lynn Fujioka, isisHawaii and Women in Technology; Sheryl Hom, isisHawaii and Women in Technology; Leslie Wilkins, Maui Economic Development Board

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

. Leveraged programs, i.e., offline events to attract grant monies. For example, for the “What is an Engineer?” project funded by the Engineering Information Foundation, WIT partnered with the UH Society of Women Engineers to present an event to middle and high school girls. The taped interviews of panel members reflecting Hawaii’s diversity will be edited and DVDs distributed free to participating schools and counselors for future reference. Leveraged resources or the “clearinghouse” approach. While in search for new eMentoring resources, additional opportunities have been created such as guest speakers for school and isisHawaii offline events; site visits for students; job shadowing; industry

Conference Session

International and Sustainability Perspectives and Women in Engineering

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mike Murphy; Cecilia Chan, Dublin Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

comes to “girls-only” activities, they enjoy the idea, but Page 11.1456.6the participation rate does not reflect their stated interest. In this aspect, it is true womenwant to feel special, but yet there exists a need to balance. It is hoped to include the malegender for some of the future activities to create the balance. A competitive spirit wouldalso be an asset between female and male, a healthy trait for the “well adjustedyoungster” in engineering.2.1.3 STAGE 3: Post-College ~ Postgraduates, research and academic staff CohortAs China and India are becoming increasingly globalise and economically strong due toits massive population and cheap

Conference Session

Using Teams, Seminars & Research Opportunities for Retention

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Harriet Hartman, Rowan University; Moshe Hartman, Retired

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

themselves (e.g., reported 0 females, when they were a female themselves;unfortunately, if they reported at least 1 female and were female themselves, there was no way toknow if they had excluded themselves or not).Grades were indicated by a self-reported response about engineering grade on the secondsemester survey, reflecting grades in the first semester’s engineering clinic, as the secondsemester had not yet ended. In the first year engineering grades are almost always exclusively inengineering clinic, as the students are otherwise scheduled for general education, computerscience and math classes but no other engineering classes. Sample programs of study can befound on the College of Engineering’s website, www.rowan.edu/engineering.Persistence in

Conference Session

The Impact of Curriculum on the Retention of Women Students

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Rose Marra, University of Missouri; Barbara Bogue, Pennsylvania State University; Kelly Rodgers, University of Missouri; Demei Shen, University of Missouri

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

major barrier to completing their engineering degree 10. Women who leaveengineering consistently express less confidence in their abilities than the men and women whostay, regardless of the fact that their actual performance is the same or better than their peers whodo not leave 8,11. The discouraging nature of low-self confidence is reflected in the fact thatwomen faced with actually failing a course are likely to leave the engineering programaltogether, while their male peers are more likely to repeat the course and continue to pursuetheir engineering degree.While gender differences in “confidence” are often reported 7, studies that examine genderdifferences in self-efficacy of students already enrolled in engineering programs show

Conference Session

Retention of Women Students

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Diane Yu Gu, University of California, Los Angeles

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

working [in industry].”Disparities in the entrepreneurial/industry connections In this study, the engineering departments revealed a high degree of involvement in theprivate sector. Many women doctoral students discussed their male advisers’ engagement inindustry and its impact on the mentoring relationship. When asked to describe their major waysof interacting with faculty advisers, their responses reflected the absence of mentoring outside oftheir primary research due to the fact that many faculty members are busy “advising somecompany in the private sector” or handling “their own engineering companies.” Suchentrepreneurism was only reported of male professors, given that the few female professors inthe School of Engineering are fairly

Conference Session

Panel Discussion: Off the Record

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Cheryl B. Schrader, Missouri University of Science and Technology; Janelle Brown; Lynn Lubamersky, Boise State University; Leslie Madsen-Brooks, Boise State University; Patricia Pyke, Boise State University; Heidi Reeder, Boise State University

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

go or be put in her place. The former was obviously preferable because, given her belligerent moods, it would be very difficult for Maurice to maintain a dominant position that would allow him to think unhindered about DNA…. The real problem then, was Rosy. The thought could not be avoided that the best home for a feminist was in another person's lab.”31 That's what he wrote! So I'm really pleased that I'm able to speak with you tonight, off the record as it were, to set the record straight.DiscussionFollowing the draft monologues, the panel moderator will lead a discussion and invite audienceparticipation to enable attendees to reflect on their experiences and on how and why those inacademia can incorporate historical

Conference Session

Myths About Gender and Race

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Alice L. Pawley, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Jordana Hoegh, Purdue University

Tagged Divisions

Liberal Education/Engineering & Society, Minorities in Engineering, Women in Engineering

this metaphor’spredominance, including: 1) what theoretical or methodological advantages and disadvantagesdoes this metaphor afford researchers? and 2) how does it highlight or mask the livedexperiences of women working in engineering academic contexts? In addition, we ask perhapsmore controversially how the reluctance to release pipeline theory from its hegemonic strongholdmight reflect engineering education’s larger disciplinary reluctance to review their currentstructure and reconstruct themselves into institutions that are more egalitarian? Page 22.684.2This paper critically explores the discourse of “pipeline” as an aim to (re)introduce

Conference Session

Effective Methods for Recruiting Women to Engineering

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Donna Milgram, Institute for Women in Trades, Technology and Science (IWITTS); Daniella Severs, Institute for Women in Trades, Technology and Science (IWITTS)

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

out comparedto the dropout rate of 6.7% among the population of respondents who did not report a negativeexperience. The fact that 69% of the female students that dropped a technology course had anegative experience at some point may indicate how important a positive classroom environmentis when it comes to retaining female students.The women who took the female technology survey are a racially diverse group, reflective ofCalifornia’s community college population.Figure 3. An Excerpt from the Demographic Section of the Survey:Question 12) What is your ethnicity? Percentage of Choice Number of Respondents

Conference Session

Recruitment & Retention of Women II

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Elizabeth T. Cady, National Academy of Engineering; Norman L. Fortenberry, American Society for Engineering Education; Catherine Didion, National Academy of Engineering

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

supported by the National Science Foundation via grant HRD- 0533520.Opinions expressed by the authors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the policies of theNational Science Foundation. Page 22.1607.8 Bibliography1. Division of Science Resources Statistics. (2008). Science and Engineering Degrees: 1966-2006. (Detailed Statistical Tables NSF 08-321), Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Retrieved January 12, 2011, from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf08321/2. Katehi, L., Pearson, G., & Feder, M. (2009). Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and

Conference Session

WIED Poster Session

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Lorelle A. Meadows, University of Michigan; Denise Sekaquaptewa, University of Michigan

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

-technicalmaterial, speaking for a shorter than expected period of time. Although limited in scope, surveyresults show that male students tended to rate their leadership and performance higher whenthere were fewer other men in the group. This research suggests that male students adopt moreactive roles and may have better outcomes than female students in project presentation groups.Introduction and BackgroundAlthough women are well represented among the total undergraduate population at theUniversity of Michigan, female students are outnumbered by male students in the College ofEngineering. In 2009 and 2010, the incoming class in engineering was 23% female, consistentwith national trends and reflective of gender stereotypes depicting engineering as a “male

Conference Session

Retention of Women Students II

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Christel Heylen, Katholieke University, Leuven; Kathleen Geraedts, Katholieke University, Leuven

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

,which is common for all engineering students. The courses are subdivided into three groups:mathematics, energy and material science, information and communication science. Parallelto the regular coursework, all engineering students take the project based course ProblemSolving and Engineering Design (acronym P&O in Dutch) that introduces them from the firstsemester onwards into real engineering practice and teamwork.1Each year around 450 students enter the first year of the Bachelor’s program, which iscommon for all engineering disciplines. Amongst them, there are only about 14% femalestudents. This is reflected within the staff of the Engineering Faculty: about 10 % of theprofessors are female.Within this study the differences in background

Conference Session

WIED: Curricular Undergraduate Student Programs

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Alistar Erickson-Ludwig, Drexel University (Eng.); Alisa Morss Clyne, Drexel University (Eng.)

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

Revenue $42,000AssessmentStudents were evaluated using quantitative and qualitative data. Students completed surveysbased on the National Engineering Students’ Learning Outcomes Survey at the start and end ofthe program. Each year the survey questions varied slightly to reflect unique changes made to theprogram or new labs that were introduced. Student’s grade point averages (GPAs) and retentionrates were also used as a form of assessment. The program participants GPAs and retention rateswere compared against women and minority non-participants and with College of Engineeringstudents as a whole.Program OutcomesProgram ParticipantsIn year one (2011) 18 students participated in the program. 14 of these were women, and

Conference Session

PANEL: After #MeToo: What’s next for Women in the Engineering Workplace?

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jennifer J VanAntwerp, Calvin College; Denise Wilson, University of Washington; Sandra D. Eksioglu, Clemson University; Joanna Wright, University of Washington

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

reflected in the growing number ofwomen who joined the workforce. Marriage rates among young people declined as peoplewaited longer to marry. Birthrates also declined (in comparison to the boom of the 1950s),household sizes dropped, and divorce rates grew, so that by 1978, women headed over 14percent of American families. Although occupations continued to remain highly segregatedalong gender lines, more and more women began to enter the workforce. By 1978, women madeup 42% of wage earners, up from 32% in 1950. Among working women, 78 held jobs in sales,service, or factories, while only 22% worked in managerial or professional occupations—and themajority of those were in teaching and nursing [16]. These segregation patterns continuedthrough the

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division: Strategies Beyond the Classroom

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Evelyn R. Sowells, North Carolina A&T State University; Nina Exner, North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University; Sherry F. Abernathy, North Carolina A&T State University; Rajeev K. Agrawal, North Carolina A&T State University ; Brenda S. Faison Ph.D., North Carolina A&T State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

-Support-Connect program is an initiative that brought several diversity programstogether at The School of Technology (SoT) of North Carolina Agricultural and TechnicalState University (NC A&T State University) to successfully support female recruitment intotechnology majors. NC A&T State University is a Historically Black College and Universitywith a STEM Early College High School located on campus. NC A&T State University as awhole has a 54 percent female undergraduate student body, but in the School of Technologyonly 25 percent of our students were female. This past challenge gave us a unique position tocapitalize on the opportunity to make a paradigm shift to be more reflective of the nation’spopulation. Although the focus of this

Conference Session

The Academic Environment

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Monica Young, Syracuse University; John Tillotson, SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

your male collaborators.Several male faculty members commented that women faculty members might have in fact, an Page 13.924.9easier time securing grants because of special NSF funding sources and initiatives targeted atfemales, but none of the women faculty members mentioned this point.Double stigma for women faculty membersThe majority of female faculty members described feeling a double stigma of possibly beinghired because they are a female and then having to work extra hard to prove they are bothdeserving of the position and earned the job because of their qualifications. The following quotesfrom female engineering faculty members reflect

Conference Session

Issues of Persistence in Engineering

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Rose Mary Cordova-Wentling, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Cristina Camacho, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

femaleengineering students were randomly selected from the following departments: Electrical andComputer Engineering 5 (17%); General Engineering, 5 (17%); Computer Science, 5 (17%);Civil and Environmental Engineering, 5 (17%); Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, 5 (17%);and Aerospace Engineering, 5 (17%).An interview guide was developed to use for the focus groups. The interview guide consisted ofthree sections. The first section of the guide consisted of opening questions, such as theparticipants’ names, majors, and what they plan to do after they graduate with their degree inengineering. The second section of the guide focused on questions that provided the participantsthe opportunity to reflect on their past experiences that hindered and assisted

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 4

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Coleen Carrigan, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo; Saejin Kwak Tanguay, University of Washington; Joyce Yen, University of Washington; Julie Simmons Ivy, North Carolina State University; Cara Margherio, University of Washington; Eve A. Riskin, University of Washington; Christine S. Grant, North Carolina State University; M. Claire Horner-Devine, University of Washington and Counterspace Consulting

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

chose those five social identities. We aimedin this exercise to help displace white privilege from the center of LATTICE practices andoutputs, as well as other privileges like heteronormativity, class status, and career stages.Another purpose of this activity was to understand which identities are most important to groupmembers, how these identities intersect with our work in designing professional interventions forwomen. Additionally, this Identity Examination activity helped LATTICE team membersilluminate and reflect on the aspects of our identity that motivate our work and our engagementin this social/intellectual movement in academic engineering. Further, our professional activitiesshape and are shaped by our lived experiences. Sharing our

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Understanding and Improving Female Faculty Experiences in STEM

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Rachel Yonemura, University of Washington ; Denise Wilson, University of Washington

Tagged Topics

ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity, Engineering Deans Council

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

is that the individual feels isolated and is able to identify potential sources of those feelings.• Mysterious Pathways: covers feelings of being stalled, stuck, or unable to move forward in a career. Originally classified as a result of not knowing the pathways to promotion or advancement, this category was expanded slightly to also reflect those career pathways that are stagnant or stalled for both men and women.• Diving Catch: refers to a tendency of some workplaces to put those who are risk averse at a disadvantage. In a diving catch work environment, the individual who feels less comfortable with risk feels more at a disadvantage with regard to advancement or performance because he or she is penalized by not

Conference Session

Research on Diversification & Inclusion

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Michael Lachney, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Dean Nieusma, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

K-12 & Pre-College Engineering, Liberal Education/Engineering & Society, New Engineering Educators, Student, Women in Engineering

approach reflects a foundationalmisalignment in educational philosophies resulting in what might provocatively be characterizedas “bait-and-switch.” The bait-and-switch characterization reflects a mismatch between theengagement logics embedded in most K-12 engineering education and the exclusionary logicsunderlying most university engineering education. While we acknowledge from the start thatuniversity engineering programs are increasingly emphasizing student engagement, the rapidexpansion of K-12 engineering programs has outpaced reforms in higher education aroundengagement, thereby magnifying the problems associated with engineering bait-and-switchexplored in this paper.In popular vernacular, bait-and-switch is often associated with fraud or

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division: Curricular Programs

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Stephen Secules, University of Maryland, College Park; Ayush Gupta, University of Maryland, College Park; Andrew Elby, University of Maryland, College Park

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

dominantnarrative that success in engineering is impossible without being good at math. .The other prominent way we see Rachel counter the “suck at math” narrative is through culturaland circumstantial explanation. Instead of seeing math performance as a reflection of her Page 26.1582.7inherent ability, Rachel tells a story of how her high school preparation and experiencecontributed to her being inadequately prepared in math. This includes early instructionaldeficiencies (“going back to middle school I had really weak algebra training”), structuraldisadvantages (at her private all-girls’ school in Connecticut, even good students rarely tookcalculus), and

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division: Retention of Undergraduate Students

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Elaine Zundl, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey; Laura Stiltz, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey; Helen M. Buettner, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

and had breakfastwith a faculty member from the Industrial and Systems Engineering department at theUniversity. The culminating event was a group trip to an art/science exhibit in New York City.ProcedureThis paper combines data from different sources in order to understand the different programcomponents that have impacted the 2012 and 2013 cohorts. Internal program evaluations fromthe office reflect student feedback about the effectiveness of the peer and industry-mentoringprogram. Data presented in this paper utilizing the AWE LAESE survey were part of a grantprovided by the Engineering Information Foundation to implement and evaluate the impact of asecond-year program for undergraduate women in engineering. Additionally, as part of a

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division: Student Issues as Related to Culture

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Beth A. Powell, Tennessee Technological University; Joanna Wolfe, Carnegie Mellon University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

likely to experience more overt behaviors, while students andfaculty predominantly described comparatively subtle comments or behaviors that gave them asense that they did not belong as women in engineering. Below we provide examples of some ofthe different types of inappropriate behaviors that women encountered.All groups discussed receiving comments reflecting the belief that women are not engineers.For example, one female engineer stated, A lot of times, when women come to meetings, most of the time, the men think they're either the secretary, not an engineer, or they expect me to do the writing or something like that. Sometimes they don't talk to you or look at you. They talk at you, which is not good, or they assume