relevant due to thepersistence of the field’s domination by men and masculinity. Mainstream discourseon gender in STEM, however, has been kept in a “black box” for decades according toAllison Phipps [1]. She states that the reliance on a simplistic gender binaryunaccompanied by racial, cultural, or sexual identity nuances may be undermining itsown political aims of gender equity. One large gap in our existing body of genderresearch and discourse is how the highly gendered landscape of engineeringeducation is experienced by those who are transgender or gender nonconforming(TGNC).[1] A. Phipps. (2007). Re-inscibing gender binaries: Deconstructing the dominantdiscourse around women’s equality in science, engineering, and technology, TheSociological
implementing our systemic change strategies, the greater the progress in womendeclared majors and graduates with bachelor’s degrees in computing. While the results in thispaper focus on computing departments, the recruitment and retention recommendations areapplicable to engineering and other STEM disciplines where women are severelyunderrepresented.IntroductionThe Extension Services for Undergraduate Program (ES-UP) at the National Center for Women& Information Technology (NCWIT), promotes systemic reform in computing and engineeringdisciplines where women are severely underrepresented. Guiding our work are a wide range ofempirically-supported social theories, such as expectancy value [1], social learning [2], socialidentity [3] and stereotype
leadership skills by undergraduate engineering students is keyto a successful long-term career and has been highlighted by both the profession, academia andgovernment funding agencies as a critical need [1]. Increasing diversity and inclusion inleadership is also critical for technology companies as they become global enterprises [2].Research on pre-college variables on leadership skills of undergraduate engineering studentsfound that co-curricular experiences result in team-based leadership skill experiences forstudents. Underrepresented Minority (URM) students that participated in URM organizationsexpressed greater leadership skill development. However, “students’ precollege characteristicsand experiences have minimal contribution to students
the inherent nature of computational modeling.1.0 importance of undergraduate research for diverse students:Table 1 presents data from American Society of Engineering Education’s annual reporton engineering education data for 2018 from U.S. institutions. Tables 1(a) - (d) presentthe 10-year trend of B.S., M.S. and Ph.D. graduates, and tenured and tenured faculty.There have been several initiatives, both sponsored and unsponsored, that have had thegoal of addressing diversity and inclusion in various facets of engineering education.The data in these tables for the two largest underrepresented groups: African-Americansand Hispanics is revealing. As a percentage, the range of degrees awarded inengineering at the B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. levels has
Introduction Technology tools used in education can positively affect student motivation [1]. Activelearning, often promoted by educational technology, has been shown to also have a significanteffect on both learning gains and self-efficacy for underrepresented minority students (URM) inSTEM [2], [3]. However, both new technologies and new teaching practices present uniquechallenges for implementation. Historically, teachers and students have faced many challenges ofimproving teaching and learning practices in diverse contexts [4]–[6]. Thus, we need tounderstand how teachers and students interact with technology and teaching practice to continueto adapt these tools to their needs and use them to benefit the self-beliefs of URM students
study. Further exploration of theseideas is warranted using qualitative methods and longitudinal studies.IntroductionStudent retention in engineering education is an important issue for a variety of reasons. Thecreative potential of engineering to benefit society is diminished when diverse students fail tograduate. This includes cognitive diversity as well as students with diverse interests, values, andexperiences, sometimes termed latent diversity. For example, Haemmerlie & Montgomery [1]found that male students with greater prudence and lower sociability had greater persistencefrom first to second year. In addition, all students should be provided equitable opportunity tosuccessfully earn engineering degrees. Equitable student outcomes
feasibility of the framework as aunified curriculum for both students and professionals and supplied valuable lessons learned forfuture NILA assessments.NomenclatureEFA Exploratory Factor AnalysisCCLP Certified Chapter Leaders ProgramNILA National Institute for Leadership AdvancementSHPE Society of Hispanic Professional EngineersSTEM Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics 11. Introduction Leadership studies have shown a direct connection between self-efficacy and leadershipeffectiveness, in which leaders adopt a self-confidence behavior to produce desired outcomes andinfluence others to accomplish a common goal [1]. Goals and self-efficacy have an
-College and Pre-Professional Supports:CWIT’s Bookend Approach to Inclusive Excellence in Undergraduate Tech Education Presented by: Danyelle Tauryce Ireland, Ph.D. Cindy Greenwood, M.Ed. Erica D’Eramo, M.A. Kate O’Keefe, M.S.Ed. 2 AGENDA 1. Introduction 2. Pre-College Programs a. Impact b. Lessons Learned 3. Pre-Professional Programs a. Impact b. Lessons Learned 4. Future Directions 5. Adapting the Model 6. Where to Start 7. Q&AThe Center for Women in Technology at the University of Maryland, Baltimore Countyhas a 21 year record of working to enable success
There are pockets of success around the nation where makerspaces have successfully reached a more diverse population, than the trending white and male nature of these spaces… However, these spaces are the exception and not the norm. And, little research has been done on these spaces to document what is working, how or why [1, p. 40].IntroductionThe maker movement and resulting makerspaces have permeated informal and formal learningspaces over the past decade. However, little work has been done to deepen the understanding ofhow inclusive these makerspaces are for engineering students from underrepresented groups.These makerspaces, physical spaces where people work on and complete making-related projectsand activities
themes (conceding and advocating) and five categories(acknowledgement, avoidance, mood, direct, and indirect). Important differences between theapproach that graduate and undergraduate students used to address gender stereotyping and biaswere found. Results show that undergraduate student responses favored concede-avoidancestrategies while graduate student responses preferred advocating strategies. These results were notaffected by participants’ engineering major.IntroductionInnovation in science and technology is an integral part of the United States economy, and thescientific advances and technological novelty have a global impact [1]. However, concerns aboutthe ability of the country to maintain its role in science, technology, engineering
in the course and may potentially help increase students’ STEM-related contentknowledge and skills.Introduction Many students are underprepared for college and a career, lacking postsecondary degreesor the required skills to enter the STEM workforce [1]. Students from historically underrepresentedgroups are least likely to have key transition knowledge and skills to go on to college and careers[2]. In some regions of the U.S., a postsecondary degree will be required for more than half offuture jobs [1]. If current trends continue, by 2025, there will be a 16 million college-educatedworker shortage in the U.S. [3]. Several studies [4], [5], [6] have focused on college and careerreadiness among underrepresented populations which include
TIDE: Why Women Leave Engineering”, 2011. (Table 2) 2There are so many things we can do as engineers – are 1 out of 10 women engineering graduates really not interestedin any of them? Or is part of the problem that they aren’t aware of all the wide-ranging opportunities, the societalcontributions available in engineering, and what they would actually be doing in different jobs? 3When discussing retaining female engineers, it’s also critical to talk about a female engineer’s first job. 40% of
authoridentified three different groups:1. Like-Minded who deny significant differences of opinion2. Triangulators who acknowledge the possibility of differences of opinion--- often not from significant issues3. Multiplisits who acknowledge expected and frequent differences of opinionCreamer (2004b) interpreted that all collaborative pairs experience differences of opinion,however they make different meaning of such process. Nevertheless, the participants all reflectedon different means and strategies to deal with conflicts and resolve them. Eventually, it appearedthat as a result of prolonged engagement and a high level of interaction between collaborators,differences of opinion are interpreted in constructive ways to the collaboration process.One
numerouscalls to diversify engineering [1, 2], there is still a low proportion of engineering bachelor’sdegrees awarded to people of color that is then reflected in the profession [3].Our three-year, transformative mixed-method study of Black students in computer (CpE),electrical (EE) and mechanical engineering (ME) addresses the following overarching researchquestions: 1. Why do Black men and women choose and persist in, or leave, CpE, EE, and ME? 2. What are the academic trajectories of Black men and women in CpE, EE, and ME? 3. In what way do these pathways vary by gender or institution? 4. What institutional policies and practices promote greater retention of Black engineering students?Project Purpose and OverviewIn our
orientation, as well as other social identities in which Black women self-identify; BFT is an appropriate theoretical framework for this qualitative investigation because it integrates, validates, centers, and gives voice to the unique experiences of Black women altogether (Collins, 2000). 4 Guiding Research Questions 1) How would you describe the “Public You” thatpresent in academic settings versus the “Private You” in personal settings? 2) What “Coping Strategies” have you used toovercome any challenges or barriers in your doctoral program? 5 Research Methodology & Data
engineering as a career. The resulting design-focused course introduces engineering through four thrusts: 1) discovering engineering, 2)engineering in society, 3) engineering professional skills, and 4) engineering design. This allowsteachers and students to make personal connections to the field of engineering. ComplementaryPD was designed with the same intent, to be inclusive of all teachers regardless of their previousexperiences with engineering. The course consists of multiple project-based modules spanningseven units that offer students opportunities to think like an engineer and develop skills such asproblem-solving, design thinking, innovation, and collaboration. The underlying goal is to enablestudents from across demographically and
Lima, Peru, Miguel came to the United States in 1999 as an international student. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Understanding the Impact of a Diversity and Inclusion Oriented Curriculum in Short-Term Study Abroad Programs for Undergraduate Engineering Students Tojan Rahhal, PhD Miguel Ayllon, PhD CoNECD 2020Introduce Presenters: 1 Study Overview The purpose of this study is to understand the impact that a diversity and inclusion oriented curriculum (EDGES Program
(afternoon). I am here to present my work onanalyzing the data curated in the resource centercsedresearch.org. The plan is to have about 10 minutes at theend of this presentation for questions, but please, feel free toask questions during the presentation if there are instanceswhere I can provide additional information about our work orprocess.Overall, we are viewing this presentation as an exploration ofdata. We are hoping to start/continue a dialog, but don’tconsider this presentation to be about presenting results, butrather the beginnings of the explorations of what this collectedand curated data may be telling us. 1 K-12 Computing Education is Growing
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
support program in engineering?IntroductionFor many students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, a college degree can providea pathway to upward mobility, particularly in lucrative fields like engineering and computerscience. However, as several studies have shown, students from economically disadvantagedbackgrounds are underrepresented in engineering and face considerable barriers to degreecompletion [1], [2]. At the University of Washington (UW), the Washington STate AcademicRedShirt (STARS) in Engineering program provides highly motivated students from low-incomebackgrounds and underserved high schools in Washington with holistic support, includingintrusive advising and a specialized two-year curriculum designed to build learning
the role of gender in the construction of smartness. Weutilized semi-structured, one-on-one interviews to explore 22 students’ beliefs about smartnesswith the aim of addressing the following research questions: 1) What do high school science andengineering students believe about smartness? and 2) How do the beliefs about smartness ofthese students who identify as male and female differ, if at all?The major findings of this study are: 1) students’ beliefs about smartness are complex anddivergent, 2) students’ beliefs about smartness are related to their interpretations of socialindicators of smartness, their epistemic beliefs, and their mindset beliefs, and 3) students whoidentity as male and female socialized in the same academic environment
providedby underrepresented students themselves, at both the undergraduate and graduate levels.Accordingly, the purpose of this paper is to explore the impact that broadening participation volunteerismhas on engineering students from underserved communities. Volunteerism traditionally refers to thevoluntary, sustained, and ongoing helpfulness of one individual to another. We argue that, despite somestudents being compensated for their contributions, their contribution to BPE efforts should be viewed asvolunteerism because: 1) their involvement is non-compulsory, and 2) they are not substantiallycompensated when compared to what they could be alternatively doing with their engineering training.This work-in-progress is part of a larger study aimed at
both of these needs, with foci on both graduate students as well as faculty andadministrators in the College. This work-in-progress paper discusses one part of this initiative:the development and implementation of a required seminar for newly matriculating graduatestudents in engineering degree programs. This one-credit course (Graduate Student Success forMulticultural Environments, or GSSME) was designed to help first-year doctoral and master’sstudents: (1) integrate into the university environment, (2) navigate the interpersonalrelationships associated with graduate school, (3) prepare for professional success as a studentand scholar, (4) build awareness of diversity and inclusion values, and (5) understand their rolein the research mentor
author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF. The ideas we present here are part of a much larger thought process (Authors, 2021, in progress) in which we are thinking about the ways in which we use quantitative methods in engineering education, and how they might be better realigned or reformed to achieve the same diversity and equity outcomes we feel are more readily achieved by qualitative methods at the time. Our treatment and presentation of demographic data variables here represent a starting point. 1 The “doing” of engineering education is full of many delicate power
process of registered, attended and enrolled.The percentages are based of the total n recorded for each separate part of the event process: registered, attended and enrolled. 8Impact Data for 2019:The impact data expressed here is a broken down by the Race and/or Ethnicity of the student participants.The graph on the left shows number of students The graph on the right shows percentage of students 9Notable Data points when comparing 2018 vs. 20191. In the Participation Numbers – Increase in URM enrollment numbers by 92. In the Participation Percentages: 1. Increase in
students, and integrates many sources of information to provide a seamlessinstructional environment. The practices and mindset associated with quality teaching mirrorpractices of entrepreneurship and the entrepreneurial mindset.The EMIT Academy uses the metaphor of teaching as entrepreneurship to frame a facultydevelopment program for engineering faculty. The EMIT Academy was modeled on the NationalScience Foundation (NSF) funded Innovation Corps (iCorps) experience [1]. In iCorps, facultywork through a curriculum to help bring technology concepts to market. In the EMIT Academy,faculty applied similar entrepreneurial principles and processes as iCorps to teaching innovationand evaluation. During the Academy, faculty do critical reflection
remote learning.1. IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic resulted in educational institutions across the world pivoting quicklyto online learning. Initially, teachers had to adapt to emergency remote teaching and wereoverwhelmed with the additional work required to develop their remote classes [1]. One surveyconducted to evaluate the successes and challenges teachers faced as they moved to virtualinstruction in spring 2020 showed that although teachers transitioned immediately to virtualinstruction, they were not properly trained or given enough time to effectively redesign theirpedagogy. Teachers were inundated with information and resources to help with virtualinstruction and overwhelmed by how quickly they had to transition [2]. Some courses
). American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Workshop Result: Teaching Science Diplomacy to Environmental Engineering Researchers Daniel B. Oerther Missouri University of Science and Technology, 1401 North Pine Street, Rolla, MO 65409AbstractA preconference workshop on the subject of science diplomacy was attended by 25participants of the 2017 biennial conference of the Association of EnvironmentalEngineering and Science Professors. The three-fold purpose of the 2017 workshop,included: 1) explaining the value of science diplomacy; 2) demonstrating aspects ofscience diplomacy; and 3) encouraging further
instructors and students view the students’ classroom roles and howrecognizing and synthesizing these roles can eventually lead to a collaborative learningenvironment.Introduction/MotivationEngineering courses are typically structured to be systematic, content-heavy, and based on finedetails and concepts. While such a course structure is thought necessary for most courses, it hasbeen observed that students tend to gravitate towards rote learning and perhaps mostlyremembering just enough to succeed in the exams [1]. There are two ways to counteract thisproblem. The first approach is to reduce the course content and focus on essential and importantconcepts in more detail, with repeated activities around the reduced number of topics [2]. Thesecond