aspects of operating well within groups from an ethical as well as logicalperspective (e.g., authorship, data sharing, etc.). In addition, most/many of our workshops includeactivities that provide experiential practice with working in groups (e.g., small group discussionof ethical case studies) and co-mentorship (e.g., forming working groups with mixed levels ofexpertise). Table 1: Guiding principles for field schools Principle Description Responsive Field schools are responsive to participants’ needs. Playful Researchers play with ideas and data to generate new knowledge. Communicative Dissemination and presentation are integral parts of research activities. Collaborative
Mentoring Network has grown and a variety of academic andpersonal schedules become harder to accommodate. This is one reason for limiting the target sizeof an annual cohort.The orientation typically takes place at a location central to the original ADVANCE institutionsand runs from approximately 9 am to 3 pm on a Saturday in August. The event is facilitatedjointly by members of the Executive Committee and includes structured events as well asbreakfast and lunch during which women are encouraged to mingle with the larger network.The structured events include: 1) a brief session introducing the literature on the benefits of mentoring; 2) a quick review of the requirements of the program, culminating with a signing of the Memorandum of
. 8Our Center is upfront with faculty that they should expect some back‐and‐forth on this. We ask for advance notice of at least 4 weeks before a grant is due and 8 weeks or more if they want a City Schools letter or if developing new programming. Letters of collaboration from our center—we will not sign the very generic standard letter unless we’ve seen the proposed budget including the outreach and the broader impacts proposal so that we know what we are committing to. Our center writes a concise and NSF‐attractive description of program for the proposal. Generally faculty don’t have much space in their proposal for this but want to get across the impact it will have. Our center
Session 3: for Visiting Faculty based on regularly scheduled seminars) Session 1: Dinner for Visiting Faculty DinnerWhat’s next?The next steps in leading transformational change will require an authentic partnership betweenWOC engineering faculty, academic engineering leadership and the engineering faculty at large.In the white paper entitled, “Inside the Double Bind: A Synthesis of Empirical Research onWomen of Color in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics,” a team led by MiaOng wrote that, “The particularistic norms of the scientific community can lead to the exclusionof women of color from the workplace milieu, often very important to career success. Institutionsshould be more aware of
learning practice are presented and discussed,and transformative outcomes that can be linked to seminar participation presented.IntroductionWomen have historically been underrepresented within the ranks of tenured or tenure-trackfaculty with Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) disciplines [1]. This isespecially so at higher academic ranks. The National Science Foundation (NSF) has recognizedthis issue and has been funding Institutional Transformation (IT) projects geared towardsremedying this shortcoming. In fall 2014 Oregon State University (OSU) received such anaward, created OREGON STATE ADVANCE, and established its overarching goal to serve as acatalyst for advancing the study and practice of equity, inclusion, and social
. Overall, theimportance of peer support and family could potentially link to students’ comfort and strengths as teammembers. Florida Both Texas st 1 generation college student Cultural diversity* Military experience Bilingual* Desire to learn Motivated* Comfortable working in Desire to succeed Naivety groups/teams* Diverse experiences Problem-solving skills Commuter* Diverse perspectives Responsible
given a brief introduction toWISE@OU and its initiatives. There were typically one to two lunches each Fall andWinter for STEM faculty members. Each session provided time for informalnetworking as well as addressed a relevant topic – such as planning for the summer,connecting with upper-level administrators (including the Provost and ChiefInformation Officer), and working on grant proposals.Workshops were generally hosted for STEM non-tenured faculty, however selectsessions were for mid-level career faculty from all departments or for departmentchairs. These workshops focused on planning for promotion (associate to fullprofessor) and goal setting.In addition to career-related workshops, WISE@OU addressed bias-related concernsthrough
support needed to host a conference and developing strategies toengage key campus administrators in the conference. While the conference committee took aleadership role in developing conference themes, the core UD ADVANCE team largely did theconference planning and administration. This required nearly full-time efforts on the part of theUD ADVANCE Director and Administrative Assistant over the course of the semester. WhileUD administrators offered generous financial support for the conference and attended several ofthe keynote addresses, they were largely absent from other conference session such as paneldiscussions on lived experiences of faculty women of color. Having UD administratorsparticipate in these types of sessions would have been
criteria to evaluate applications. Here, we collectively discover theimportance of linking the evaluation criteria to the requirements asked for in the jobadvertisement. We also directly confront the difficulty a search committee faces in reachingconsensus about what constitutes excellence in research, teaching, and inclusion. A significantportion of this conversation is also devoted to modeling how to create metrics to assess theinclusive excellence statement, which is a new application requirement for most of our searches.We offer the following general guidelines, which can be tailored to the needs of departments: 1)an awareness of challenges underrepresented groups face in higher education and theirconsequences; and 2) a track record or a plan
/hbcu_research_summit.html[12] J. S. Katz and B. R. Martin, “What is research collaboration?” Research Policy, vol. 26, no.1, pp. 1-18, 1997.[13] H. Bukvova, “Studying research collaboration: A literature review,” Sprouts: WorkingPapers on Information Systems, vol. 10, no. 3, 2010.[14] B. Bozeman, D. Fay, and C.P. Slade, “Research collaboration in universities and academicentrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art,” Journal of Technology Transfer, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 1-67,2013.[15] B. Bozeman, J. S. Dietz, and M. Gaughan, “Scientific and Technical Human Capital: Analternative model for research evaluation,” International Journal of Technology Management,vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 716-740, 2001.[16] B. Bozeman and E. Corley, “Scientists’ collaboration strategies: Implications
Engineering since July 2016, in which capacity he provides leadership and support for implementation of new and revised practices to promote a more inclusive, equitable workplace in the College.Dr. Thuy T Tran, Oregon State University Thuy Tran directs marketing and communications at Oregon State University’s College of Engineering. In this leadership position, she works to manage external perceptions, strengthen relationships with stake- holders, and support efforts to achieve the college’s strategic goals. These efforts include showcasing high-achieving students, generating recognition for faculty research, and promoting the college’s world- class facilities. Thuy’s unique educational and professional background
about faculty satisfaction reveal faculty of color perceivedepartmental climates as less positive than peers across multiple dimensions. Through interviewswith departing faculty, as well as faculty negotiating retention packages, we clarify additionalfactors affecting faculty of color retention. In this paper, we (1) discuss main findings about theclimate for faculty of color on our campus, (2) describe how social science research, institutionaldata, and evaluation inform our programmatic work, and (3) highlight how the strategic use ofdata allows us to better engage campus stakeholders in institutional change efforts in support offaculty diversity.IntroductionThe underrepresentation of faculty women of color in academia remains a national