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

members.Upon review several modifications to the website were communicated to the HR specialist, whoalso acted as liaison between any and all constituents. A major modification reflected howmedium-to-large institutions receive and process applications. Through various communicationand performance difficulties on the part of the webmaster required that, the HR specialistworked closely with the webmaster over the next18 months in order for a majority of therequested changes to be implemented. Unfortunately, these changes were not completed tospecification or functioning.To address these technical limitations and frustrations, a local technology group was hired toexamine and to correct the architecture and functioning of the website. After six months

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 7

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jennifer C Mallette, Boise State University; Harold Ackler P.E., Boise State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

traditionally-aged collegestudents who are white and cisgendered.While more quantitative data can provide essential big picture data, qualitative case studies havethe advantage of highlighting specific experiences, focusing on the particular instead of thegeneral [15]. In other words, case studies provide rich context and detail, though researchersmust be careful about generalizing what they find. In addition, assessing women’s experiencesmore quantitatively may not be possible because of the number of women present in a givenengineering program (the MSE program studied here has only 6 women out of a cohort of 22enrolled in the senior project course) and because their grades or other methods of numericalevaluation may not adequately reflect their

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 5

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Bradley Joseph Priem, Northeastern University; Caroline Ghio, Northeastern University; Hannah Boyce, Northeastern University; Sydney Anne Morris, Northeastern University; Emma Kaeli, Stanford University; Tyler Byrne Cole, Northeastern University; Paul A. DiMilla, Northeastern University; Rachelle Reisberg, Northeastern University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

likely to be retained [6].Effects of gender on retention and successGender influences patterns of retention and academic success in engineering programs. Inengineering majors, men typically outnumber women, as reflected in a 2017 report whichrevealed only 21.3% of bachelor’s degrees in engineering were earned by women [14]. Despitewomen earning fewer engineering degrees than men, a positive correlation between being femaleand graduation rates has been found [3]. Women frequently have been reported to be more likelythan men to earn a bachelor’s degree once enrolled, regardless of the time frame needed to earnthe degree [15] [16] [17]. The evidence, however, has not been uniform: Lord et al. [18] foundno significant difference in four-year

Conference Session

Computing -- Increasing Participation of Women and Underrepresented Minorities

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Laura K. Dillon, Michigan State University; Maureen Doyle, Northern Kentucky University; Linda Ott, Michigan Technological University; Wendy Powley, Queen's University; Andrea E Johnson, Spelman College

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Minorities in Engineering, Pre-College Engineering Education, Women in Engineering

voices in computing ensures oursociety grows and develops accordingly.My participation in BPC efforts has benefited me in many ways. It has strengthened myemotional intelligence; developed my capacity for mentoring; and increased my knowledge ofresources available to students, curriculum development, and new technologies for CS education.It encouraged me to reflect on how my career might best align with my passions. I reasoned thatI could have a bigger impact training the voices of the future than being a singular voice that wasnot reflective of a larger community. My participation in BPC efforts expanded my professionalnetwork; it gave me access to many mentors who helped facilitate my transition from industryand into academia as a tenure-track

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 8

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Kerry Meyers, University of Notre Dame; Victoria E. Goodrich, University of Notre Dame; Taylor Maida, University of Notre Dame; Simran Moolchandaney, University of Notre Dame; Gabrielle Tanjuatco, University of Notre Dame; Caroline Lubbe, University of Notre Dame

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

focused on gaining exposure tothe engineering in ski resorts including lift operations and snow making processes while buildingstudent-student and student-faculty relationships. During the 4-hour bus ride to the ski resort,students were asked to read a scholarly article on one of eight topics related to ski resorts.Students met in small groups with others that selected the same ski related topic and gave areport out to the larger group. At the ski resort, students had a behind the scenes tour of the liftoperations and of the snow making process. Students had the rest of the day to ski or take alesson with other women on the trip. The evening included a team building workshop whichincluded reflection on the day’s activities and how their

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 7

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Cara Mawson, Rowan University; Cheryl A Bodnar, Rowan University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

thisarticle, Wasburns suggests providing a gender-neutral classroom by avoiding using sportsexamples or providing assessments earlier and more frequently [3]. Other strategies for gender-focused inclusion can revolve around assigning personal reflections for students to helpunderrepresented engineering students feel a stronger sense of belonging [4]. While thesestrategies may prove useful for building inclusive class-based environments, these strategies mayfall flat when students are utilizing technology as part of their instructional practice.Technology is a critical part of instructional design; however, the types and implementation oftechnology can affect the success and motivation of students. For example, women are heavilyinfluenced by the

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Lauren Drankoff, University of Dayton; Sandra L. Furterer, University of Dayton; Elizabeth Hart, University of Dayton

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

form mentoring programs, it is important to monitor theoutcomes over multiple years to accurately monitor the effects. There is also a lack of researchon the effect of mentoring programs on the mental health of students during COVID-19.Methods The mentoring program within the WISE program has now been running for threesemesters since Fall 2019 and the findings after the Fall 2020 semester were measured to 1)assess the cohort’s satisfaction and engagement in the program through a voice of customersurvey including reflections, 2) compare the increase in the number of mentor/mentee pairs fromthe initial pilot period of Fall 2019 compared to the Fall 2020, 3) compare the average GPAs and4) the retention in engineering and science for women

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 6

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Shawna Vican, University of Delaware; Robin Andreasen, University of Delaware; Heather Doty, University of Delaware; L. Pamela Cook, University of Delaware

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

the use of student evaluations ofteaching in peer review and tenure and promotion processes. Given the abrupt switch to onlineeducation in spring 2020, as well as continued virtual delivery of most classes in the 2020-2021academic year, task force members were concerned that traditional course evaluation metrics andstudent feedback would reflect student dissatisfaction with online education, rather thansummative feedback as to teaching quality. This concern was compounded by the known bias instudent evaluations of teaching, where female faculty, faculty of color, and those from othermarginalized groups are disadvantaged [8], [21]. For both spring 2020 and the full 2020-2021academic year, student course feedback is to be included in future

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 5

Collection

2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Anne-Marie A Lerner, University of Wisconsin, Platteville; Christopher Frayer, University of Wisconsin - Platteville

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

funding and retention data areperhaps more reflective of the unique differences between each participant rather than a true measureof the program’s impact.During the inaugural 2014/2015 academic year the EMS NFLC met 23 times and averaged sevenparticipants per meeting (from a pool of 27 new faculty and academic staff). There were 17 uniqueparticipants, and 15 faculty and staff participated in two or more meetings. During the 2015/2016academic year, the EMS NFLC met 22 times and averaged four participants per meeting (from a pool of13 new faculty and academic staff). There were 8 unique participants, and 7 faculty and staffparticipated in two or more meetings.Feedback from participating faculty during the first two years was overwhelmingly

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 5

Collection

2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Carol Elizabeth Marchetti, Rochester Institute of Technology (COE); Elizabeth Dell, Rochester Institute of Technology (COE); Maureen S. Valentine, Rochester Institute of Technology (CAST); Sharon Patricia Mason, Rochester Institute of Technology; Margaret B. Bailey, Rochester Institute of Technology (COE); DeLois Kijana Crawford, Rochester Institute of Technology (GCCIS)

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

through a practice of initiating, partnering, and policy making.Advance team members and key campus partners commence change initiatives by identifyingbarriers. Once a new program is developed, input and feedback gathered through campuspartnerships. Finally, successful ideas inform policies and procedures to formalize new practices.AcknowledgementsSupport for this research was provided by the National Science Foundation ADVANCEInstitutional Transformation program under Award No. 1209115. Any opinions, findings, andconclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] RIT Human Resources and Institutional Research (2015). NSF

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Emma Kaeli, Northeastern University; Tyler Byrne Cole, Northeastern University; Bradley Joseph Priem, Northeastern University; Rachel Lauren Shapiro, Northeastern University; Paul DiMilla, Northeastern University; Rachelle Reisberg, Northeastern University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

their overall course performance. [3]For STEM students, particularly female students, self-efficacy – defined as a student’s belief inhis or her own ability to achieve academic success – is one of the greatest predictors of successin academic coursework. Female students, in general, rate themselves with lower self-efficacy inengineering coursework, even when they are, in actuality, achieving the same or better gradesthan their male counterparts. [7] According to previous research, there are a variety of factorsthat influence student self-efficacy and academic self-confidence, including perceived lecturerdistance and intimidation. [8] Greater perceived faculty distance reflects a colder, detached, andmore impersonal teaching style, which affects

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Christina K. Lam , Arizona State University; Samantha N. Cruz, Arizona State University; Nadia N. Kellam, Arizona State University; Brooke Charae Coley, Arizona State University, Polytechnic campus

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

workas a reflection of themselves. For example, Wynita, a third-year robotics engineering student,described how the makerspace allows her to create. In the makerspace environment, I don’t feel like I’m being pushed to do something. I’m working on this. I’m going to do it my way. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. This is going to be me. This is going to be my own work.It appeared that more time in the makerspace for these participants to create their own projectsfostered more autonomy and confidence. The makerspace also represented an environmentwhere there was some flexibility for trial and error. Although Winnie noted that female makers,including herself, felt self-imposed pressure to maintain perfection, she also acknowledged

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 6

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Agnes Germaine d'Entremont P.Eng., University of British Columbia, Vancouver; Kerry Greer, University of British Columbia; Katherine A. Lyon, University of British Columbia, Vancouver

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

” may be a more effective strategy forultimately attaining a distribution of gender within engineering that reflects the largercommunity.References1. Roy J, ASEE. Engineering by the Numbers [Internet]. 2018. Available from: https://ira.asee.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/2018-Engineering-by-Numbers- Engineering-Statistics-UPDATED-15-July-2019.pdf2. Bystydzienski JM, Brown A. “I Just Want to Help People”: Young Women’s Gendered Engagement with Engineering. Fem Form. 2012;24(3):1–21.3. Diekman AB, Clark EK, Johnston AM, Brown ER, Steinberg M. Malleability in communal goals and beliefs influences attraction to stem careers: evidence for a goal congruity perspective. J Pers Soc Psychol. United States; 2011;101(5

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John M. Mativo, University of Georgia; Uduak Z. George, San Diego State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

U.S.filled in 47% of all jobs but only 24% of the STEM jobs [6]. In other words, 76% of the STEMjobs are held by men. In community services, women had a volunteer rate of 27.8% in 2015compared to men 21.8%. Women volunteered at a higher rate than men and this was true acrossall age groups, educational levels, and major demographics characteristics (such as race andemployment status) [7].Influence is closely associated with leadership. A capable leader provides guidance at theworkplace, home, and/or community [8]. It follows that, those influencing are consideredefficient leaders that motivate their colleagues, family or community [9, 10]. Transformativeleadership idealizes influence which reflect standards of moral and ethical conduct; it

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Poster Session

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Elizabeth Horstman, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Danielle Jamie Mai, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Yanfen Li, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign; Rohit Bhargava, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

4institutions. To assess whether the program content matched the interests of the participants,participants were asked to indicate the type of institution(s) to which they plan to apply.Institutions were categorized into four groups: research intensive, research and teachingintensive, teaching intensive, and community college. Participants were also asked to indicate ifthey were interested in tenure or non-tenure track positions. As shown in Figure 2, participants’interests shifted throughout the program. Although no conclusive tends were observed with theparticipants’ change in the type of institution to which they were interested in applying, this datadoes reflect the sentiment of indecision that was observed in the post program interviews

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division: Retention of Undergraduate Students

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jennifer I. Clark, Montana State University ; Sarah L. Codd, Montana State University; Angela Colman Des Jardins, Montana State University; Christine M. Foreman, Montana State University; Brett W. Gunnink, Montana State University; Carolyn Plumb, Montana State University; Katherine Ruth Stocker

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

Press.Marra, R., Edmister, W., Watford, V., Bogue, B., Tsai, C., and Gooden, F. (2010). Peermentoring: Impact on mentees and comparison with non-participants. Proceedings of the AnnualConference and Exposition of the American Society for Engineering Education.Niemi, A., Green, M., and Roudkovski, M. (2013). Evaluation of a first-year retention project:Findings at halftime. Proceedings of the Annual Conference and Exposition of the AmericanSociety for Engineering Education.Building Engineering and Science Talent (BEST), 2004. A Bridge for All. www.Bestworkforce.org, accessed 2-19-15.Meyers, K., Silliman, S., Gedde, N. and Ohland, M. (2010). A comparison of engineeringstudents’ reflections on their first-year experience. Journal of Engineering

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Poster Session

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Celine Manoosingh, Georgia Southern University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

; and3) a small group cohort experience that emphasizes reflective and experiential learning through smallgroup team building, but also includes social activities. The BUILD program began in the summer of2006 and has continued uninterrupted to the present.The success of the BUILD program has fueled the initiative. BUILD cohorts consistently have higheraverage first term GPAs, high school GPA averages, and average SAT scores compared to the Universityaverages (The first-year retention rates for BUILD cohorts increased from 89% for the (2006 cohort) to ahigh of 95% (2012 cohort). This compared to the University rates which increased from 79% for the(2006 cohort) to a high of 81% for the (2012 cohort), with a high of 81% also occurring for the Fall

Conference Session

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

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Eddie L Jacobs, University of Memphis; Amy L de Jongh Curry, University of Memphis; Russell J. Deaton, University of Memphis; Carmen Astorne-Figari, University of Memphis; Douglas Clark Strohmer, University of Memphis

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

more relevant to societal needs.It is not just about gender equity — it is about doing better engineering for us all.”References [1] National Society of Professional Engineers. http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics/engineers-creed, 1954. [2] IEEE. IEEE Mission Statement. http://www.ieee.org/about/vision mission.html. [3] James A. Stieb. Understanding Engineering Professionalism: A Reflection on the Rights of Engineers. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(1):149–169, 2011. [4] A. Kirn and L. Benson. Quantitative assessment of student motivation to characterize difference between engineering majors. Frontiers in Education Conference, 2013. [5] M. F. Fox, G. Sonnert, and I. Nikiforova. Programs for Undergraduate Women in

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

requirements.ConclusionIn conclusion, public educational institutions are responsible for educating students in a safe andeffective environment. Across the US, the number of female students engaging in PLTW doesnot reflect the population as a whole. Therefore, women will continue to be underrepresented inthese programs unless measures are taken. Offering all-female PLTW cohorts have proven theirsuccess to attract and retain more female students. Though the evidence is clear, all-femalePLTW cohorts are slow to be adopted. There is a fear that single-sex education in a mixedsetting gives preferential treatment and an unfair advantage to some students. However, withoutthese interventions, the representation of women in PLTW and engineering programs willincrease

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ona Egbue, University of South Carolina Upstate; Arshia Khan, University of Minnesota Duluth; Rania Al-Hammoud P.Eng., University of Waterloo

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

is that women in academia are often seen as lessaccomplished and less capable than their male counterparts regardless of their achievementsand as a result, receive lower ratings [16]. Most evaluations do not reflect the faculty’sknowledge, clarity and organization, but show students’ attitudes towards the class andinstructor instead of information on teaching performance, resulting in some instructorsreceiving higher rating by offering students extra grades [14], [17].There are fewer studies conducted on minority faculty research, especially females and racialminorities, compared to studies on faculty evaluations [18]. Furthermore, females typicallyspend more time on teaching and advising, reducing the time that could be used for

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Diane Nicole Abdullah, Florida International University; Trina L. Fletcher, Florida International University; Ronald Quintero, Florida International University; Jade R. Moten, Florida International University; Brittany Nicole Boyd, Morgan State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

Engineering”, Alonso [11] studied how engineering identities intersect with other identities. This study brings another element to the framework of Intersectionality - the individual’s perception and a peer’s perception of them being identified as an engineer. To clarify, we are not only observing if the individual identifies as an engineer but how that reflection compares to them feeling they are being portrayed as an engineer within their community. It is a matter of discerning which factors contribute to these identities and which factors dissociate the student with that identity. Through our study, it was apparent that this identity could be solidified by being established prior to attending college. Rincon [5] states [that] “...expressing early

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 10

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Nolgie O. Oquendo-Colón, University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez Campus; Lourdes A. Medina, University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez Campus; Maria Angelica Velazquez, Montana State University; David Claudio, Montana State University; Aidsa I. Santiago-Roman, University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez Campus

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

39.52 compared to 36.45 from UPRM. Therefore UPRM participantsexhibited characteristics of a collectivist society in which people are born into groups that providesupport and help to others in exchange for loyalty. Thus, the UPRM student population reflects amore ingrained sense of collectivism. Meanwhile, the mainland score of 91 represents anindividualist society, where people expect to take care of themselves. On the contrary, MSUstudent population scores align with the characteristics of a more collectivist culture.The analysis by gender revealed that female students reported a score lower than the generalpopulation at both institutions, with 33.98 for MSU and 36.31 for UPRM. For male students, weobtained a higher score of 46.40 and 37.18

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 5

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Jeanne Christman, Rochester Institute of Technology (CET); Randy Yerrick, Fresno State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

classroom observations, analytic and reflective notes [34]were generated and logged in an audit trail, while the identification of codes and their origins werecarefully noted. It was also during this process that emerging themes were identified, whichinformed interview protocols for member check interviews. Throughout the coding process, wecompiled transcripts and field notes with the help of hyperRESEARCH. We assigned codes toeach data set, extracted the list of codes and used those to assign codes to the next data set, addingnew codes as they were generated.Once all qualitative data were completely coded, we analyzed them to identify themes in thecodes. With trustworthiness in mind, we identified themes that were common to at least threedifferent

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 4

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Sarah Appelhans, University at Albany-SUNY

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

about. In contrast,amongst women born overseas, more explanation was needed, both on their part and mine. Thiswas reflected in their opening narratives as well.Here is Kalpana, a young engineer who was educated in India and came to the United States forgraduate school: Me: How did you become interested in engineering as a career? Kalpana: So I think the main reason goes back to my family, and what my parents, even my grandfather, what they did, how they thought about things. That’s what got me into physics or math or engineering in general. My grandfather was a schoolteacher and eventually the principal of the school. He never got to study more than a bachelor’s level. In spite of that, the amount of

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 5

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Anu Osta, Rowan University; Jennifer Kadlowec, Baldwin Wallace University; Alissa Papernik; Amanda Ferreira Dias-Liebold, Rowan University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

DiscussionBy fall 2019 semester, about 260 students had participated in the online survey, 68.92% male,and 30.28% female and 0.8% identified as other. The online survey addressed pre-college,family background, campus life and faculty interaction, peer interaction, extra-curricularactivities, internship experience, and social life. Charts reflecting this data can be seen inAppendix C. Of those surveyed, 41.67% were Mechanical Engineering students, 13.33% wereBiomedical Engineering, 18.33% Civil Engineering, 16.67% Chemical Engineering, 8.33%Electrical Engineering, and 1.67% Engineering Entrepreneurship.When surveyed about family background, almost 29.49% of the participants responded that theyhad an immediate family member in the engineering field. As

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Poster Session

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Tanya Stanko P.E., Innopolis University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

have not chosen a career in IT were invited to participate ina focus group for one-to-one interviews, where young women reflected on the reasonsbehind their decision not to continue in IT. Here we present qualitative results of thesurvey.MethodologyFor the follow up survey we utilized the database of clients who enrolled inextracurricular courses in IT from Unium. We have been provided with data going backto 2007. From the broad range of educational courses offered by Unium we have focusedonly on those that are IT-related, namely: Web-design, computer flash graphics, andprogramming in C/C++. We limited the selection pool to over 900 pupils satisfying thosecriteria, including 142 girls.We aimed to form a group of 8-10 young women for a focus

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 6

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Lourdes A. Medina, University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez; Saylisse Davila, University of Puerto Rico-Mayaguez; Olga Beatriz Rivera, Amgen Manufacturing Limited; Nolgie Oquendo-Colon, University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez Campus; Maria Angelica Velazquez, Montana State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 7

Collection

2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Christina S. Morton, University of Michigan ; Selyna Beverly, University of Michigan

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Elizabeth Dell, Rochester Institute of Technology (COE); Carol Elizabeth Marchetti, Rochester Institute of Technology (COE); Sharon Patricia Mason, Rochester Institute of Technology; Margaret B. Bailey, Rochester Institute of Technology (COE); Maureen S. Valentine, Rochester Institute of Technology (CAST); DeLois Kijana Crawford, Rochester Institute of Technology (GCCIS)

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

. Grant funded career navigation efforts continue to be institutionalized within the university structure. Career navigation focused initiatives are also undergoing an evaluation to better understand how these efforts support the project’s overall objectives and project goal. Acknowledgements Support for this research was provided by the National Science Foundation ADVANCE Institutional Transformation program under Award No. 1209115. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. References1. “RIT_EFFORT_Career_Life_Survey.pdf” NSF ADVANCE RIT (2009, October). Web

Conference Session

Women in Engineering Division Technical Session 4

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kristina Rigden, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona; Mariappan Jawaharlal, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona; Nicole Gutzke, Cal Poly Pomona

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

dates back to the American philosopher John Dewey who defined it asreflective thinking. Dewey defined reflective thinking as “…the ground or basis for a belief isdeliberately sought and its adequacy to support the belief examined” [4]. This definition evolvedinto intellectual abilities and skills by Benjamin Bloom who developed Bloom’s taxonomy ofeducational objectives [5]. Currently, P21 classifies critical thinking as reasoning effectively, usingsystems thinking, making judgements and decisions, and solving problems [3]. Critical thinking is important to develop in students. The Femineer® Program is able tohelp students develop critical thinking skills by introducing systems thinking into the WearableTechnology curriculum. This will