Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Understanding and Changing Engineering Culture

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mary E Fitzpatrick, University of Wisconsin Madison College of Engineering; Manuela Romero, University of Wisconsin, Madison; Jennifer Sheridan, University of Wisconsin, Madison

Tagged Topics

ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

, 2016Changes in Undergraduate Engineering College Climate and Predictorsof Major Commitment: Results from Climate Studies in 2008 and 2015Abstract This paper presents results of two cross-sectional investigations of educational andinterpersonal climate in a college of engineering at a large mid-western university. In 2008 andin 2015 we deployed a survey ("Project to Assess Climate in Engineering”) to undergraduateengineering students. In each survey year, just over 1000 eligible students participated andresponded to items contributing to scales rating their professors, teaching assistants, collegeresources, confidence (self-efficacy) in engineering, student interactions, perceptions ofengineering, and commitment to an engineering major

Conference Session

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

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Shawna Fletcher, Texas A&M University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Pre-College Engineering Education Division, Women in Engineering

students.In Texas, students were measured over a six-year period. From 2006 – 2010, enrollmentquadrupled and participants increased 18,686 individuals (4498 in 2006 to 23184 in 2010)9.Female participation increased 586% and Hispanic students increased 507%. This study alsoshowed a high impact on students enrolling in higher education (62.1%) compared to their non-PLTW counterparts (58.4%)9. In addition, post-secondary enrollment was slightly greater forfemales (63.5%) compared to their non-PLTW peers (63.1%).Several studies have examined self-efficacy of females for math and science subjects whenparticipating in PLTW10,11,12. Exposure to engineering through PLTW has shown to havesignificant impact on self-efficacy and underrepresented students10. The

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Strategies Beyond the Classroom to Tackle Gender Issues

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Nora Madjar, University of Connecticut; Bryan Douglas Huey, University of Connecticut; Leslie M. Shor, University of Connecticut

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

. TheChronbach alpha reliability of the items was .75 and we averaged them to create an IntrinsicMotivation/Excitement index.Self-efficacy/confidence in STEM activities: To measure the importance of self-confidence weasked students to 1) Assess their STEM abilities; 2) how they are doing in STEM-relatedcourses; 3) Where they position themselves among other students in the courses related to theirmajor. For all items students were asked to use a 7-point Likert scale. The reliability of the threeitems was .70 and we averaged them to form a self-efficacy/confidence in STEM activitiesindex.Career goal – social impact: One of the factors identified as an important determinant of careerchoice is having the potential for social impact. We asked participants to

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Retention Programs for Diverse Students

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Rachel Lauren Shapiro, Northeastern University; Emily Olina Wisniewski, Johns Hopkins University; Emma Kaeli, Northeastern University; Tyler Byrne Cole, Northeastern University; Paul A. DiMilla, Northeastern University; Rachelle Reisberg, Northeastern University

Tagged Topics

ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Minorities in Engineering, Women in Engineering

, were factored intothe statistics. [4] GPA was a greater predictor of retention and eventual graduation for malestudents than female students. Meanwhile, moderate to high levels of achievement increasedlevels of confidence in females but accentuated female students’ social discomfort as a minority,making self-doubt and social discomfort better predictors of graduation rate for females thanGPA. This trend was valid when women were both a numerical minority in classes and werestereotyped, as women often are in engineering programs. [4]The existing literature suggests that factors other than just GPA impact a female student’sdecision to remain in and eventually graduate from an engineering program. For example, self-efficacy, or a specified level

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Strategies Beyond the Classroom to Tackle Gender Issues

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jason Bazylak, University of Toronto; Ruth A Childs, University of Toronto; Aimy Bazylak, University of Toronto

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

diminishes female confidence (stereotype threat) [13-15],• females have an inborn disposition for ‘caring’ or ‘humanities’ jobs [16], and• female secondary students have lower self-efficacy and interest in engineering [17].In addition to under-representation there is an unequal distribution of female enrolmentamongst the disciplines (See Figures 1 and 2). Understanding what draws a higherpercentage of female students to disciplines such as chemical engineering, may revealstrategies to increase female enrolment in other disciplines.Within this multi-stage research project, we will use survey research methods to betterunderstand the reasons for this under-representation. We hypothesize that one reason for theunder

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Understanding and Changing Engineering Culture

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Omoju Miller, UC Berkeley

Tagged Topics

ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

77 college students chose to continue to the next more demanding firstcourse intended for CS majors, CS61A.Research MethodsFormative, mixed-method research was conducted to test out the effectiveness of Beauty and Joyof Computing (BJC) curriculum as implemented in UC Berkeley’s CS10, in attracting historicallyunderrepresented students. To gain a comprehensive analysis into the socio-curriculareffectiveness of the BJC curriculum as the first class in a student’s CS trajectory, it wasbenchmarked against CS61A—the first class for majors, and increasingly, for non-majors aswell.Survey instruments were developed to measure participants’ self-reported efficacy along severaldimensions. To determine the role of identity and self efficacy; as well as

Conference Session

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

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

J. Kasi Jackson, West Virginia University ; Joel Alejandro Mejia, Angelo State University; Maja Husar Holmes, West Virginia University; Rachel R. Stoiko, West Virginia University

Tagged Topics

ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity, Engineering Deans Council

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

gender equity, we focused onsupporting the behaviors (e.g. the climate variables discussed above) to promote equity. Wewanted to see how this indirect dual agenda approach impacted faculty beliefs about their 11department’s ability to achieve gender equity, as well as their perceptions of other key aspects ofdepartmental climate.Our research addresses an issue raised by Acker: “Does the sex composition of change agentgroups make a difference in the success of projects?” (p. 627)4 Our goal was to see if there weredifferential impacts of the Dialogues process on departmental climate measures among academicdepartments that vary in the percent of

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Understanding and Changing Engineering Culture

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Lisa Abrams, Ohio State University; Suzanne Grassel Shoger, The Ohio State University; Lauren Corrigan, Ohio State University; Steven Y. Nozaki, Ohio State University; Mitsu Narui, The Ohio State University Multicultural Center; Adithya Jayakumar, The Ohio State University

Tagged Topics

ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges (Report of the Project on the Status and Education of Women).5 Morris, L. K., & Daniel, L. G. (2008). Perceptions of a chilly climate: Differences in traditional and non- traditional majors for women. Research in Higher Education, 49(3), 256-273.6 Pascarella, E. T., Nora, A., & Terenzini, P. T. (1999). Women's perceptions of a “chilly climate” and cognitive outcomes in college: Additional evidence. Journal of College Student Development, 40(2), 163- 177.7 Malicky, D. (2003). A literature review on the under-representation of women in undergraduate engineering: Ability, self-efficacy, and the" chilly climate”.age, 8, 1.8 Haines, V. A., Wallace

Conference Session

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

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Lydia Ross, Arizona State University; Eugene Judson, Arizona State University; Stephen J Krause, Arizona State University; James A Middleton, Arizona State University; Casey Jane Ankeny, Arizona State University; Ying-Chih Chen, Arizona State University; Robert J Culbertson, Arizona State University; Keith D. Hjelmstad, Arizona State University; Yong Seok Park, Arizona State University; Bethany B Smith, Arizona State University

Tagged Topics

ASEE Diversity Committee, Engineering Deans Council

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

., & Tarule, J. (1986). Women’s Ways of Knowing: The Development of Self, Voice, and Mind. New York: Basic Books.11. Sprague, J., & Massoni, K. (2004). Student Evaluations and Gendered Expectations: What We Can’t Count Can Hurt Us. Sex Roles, 53(11-12), 779-793.12. Bailey, J. G. (1999). Academics’ Motivation and Self-Efficacy for Teaching and Research. Higher Education Research and Development, 18(3), 343-359.13. Schuster, J.H., & Finkelstein, M.J. (2006). The American Faculty: The Restructuring of Academic Work and Careers. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.14. Winslow, S. (2010). Gender Inequality and Time Allocations Among Academic Faculty. Gender & Society, 24(6), 769-793.15. Hart, J., & Cress, C. M

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Retaining and Developing Women Faculty

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Theresa M. Vitolo, Gannon University; Karinna M Vernaza, Gannon University; Lori D. Lindley, Gannon University; Elisa M. Konieczko, Gannon University; Weslene Tallmadge, Gannon University

Tagged Topics

ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity, Engineering Deans Council

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy, Women in Engineering

director at-large (2013-15) positions.Dr. Lori D. Lindley, Gannon University Lori D. Lindley is an Associate Professor in the Department of Psychology and Counseling, and the Associate Dean of the College of Humanities, Education, and Social Sciences. She earned her B.A. in Psychology from the University of Notre Dame, and her M.S. and Ph.D. in Counseling Psychology from Iowa State University. She serves on the editorial boards of the Journal of Vocational Behavior and the Journal of Career Assessment. Her research is on women’s career development, specifically self-efficacy and career barriers.Dr. Elisa M. Konieczko, Gannon University Elisa M. Konieczko, Professor of Biology at Gannon University, received her