how Cathy was recommended differently or equivalently toCarl. Further explanation of procedures is provided in the Method section. This study addressedthe following research questions: RQ1. How does a STEM faculty member’s gender a. affect recommendations from others to take on roles of (a) research, (b) leadership, and (c) teaching/advising? b. How does this vary across disciplines? RQ2. To what extent do recommenders’ characteristics (i.e., gender, URM status, years of experience, administrator experience, and discipline) affect recommendations?Relevant LiteratureAlthough women earn the majority of bachelor’s degrees in the United States they
Paper ID #27363Board 136: An Intersectional Perspective to Studying Microaggressions inEngineering ProgramsDr. Cristina Poleacovschi, Iowa State University Dr. Poleacovschi is an Assistant Professor at Iowa State University. She researches issues of diversity and focuses on intersectional aspects of microaggressions.Dr. Scott Grant Feinstein, Iowa State University Dr. Scott Feinstein is an expert in research design and comparative and identity politics.Dr. Stephanie Luster-Teasley, North Carolina A&T State University Dr. Stephanie Luster-Teasley is Professor and Chair of the Department of Civil, Architectural, and En
year general chemistry course. SIincludes group and one-on-one peer tutoring as well as instructor and teaching assistant officehours. Previous research has shown that participation in SI correlates with higher course grades,more confidence in course material, greater material retention, higher overall GPA, and greaterstudent retention and graduation rates. [1] Engaging students in SI, however, has been a persistentchallenge. For example, a previous study found only 40% of students enrolled in historicallydifficult classes (including general chemistry) took advantage of the SI provided. This studyfound participants in SI were more likely to have a final course grade of B or better and lesslikely to withdraw from the class. [2]Last year we
engineering efficacy measure with studentresponses from the 2013 cohort; that analysis produced two distinct factors. For this study, weused one of these factors—the engineering major confidence factor—which captures students’belief in their ability to succeed as an undergraduate majoring in engineering. Items in this factorare: § I can succeed in an engineering major § I can complete the math requirements for most engineering majors § I can succeed in an engineering major while not having to give up participation in my outside interests § I can excel in an engineering major during the current academic year § I can succeed (earn either an A or B) in an advanced physics course § I can complete any engineering
compete with their built project vehicles. Examples of CDS are:Aero Design, Baja SAE, Clean Snowmobile Challenge, Formula SAE, and Super Mileage. Thesafety requirements and design standards are structured to challenge the students’ knowledge,creativity, and imagination. In addition to providing a meaningful, significant engineeringactivity, CDS creates the opportunity to begin building a sense of expectation and understandingof the professional engineering workforce – specifically fostering communication skills,promoting teamwork needed to solve complex problems, and increasing engineering self-confidence. Additional skills and benefits students gain are: (a) developing engineering self-confidence, (b) fostering a positive attitude about
Engineering Education, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 347-365, 2015.[2] E. O. Wisniewski, R. L. Shapiro, E. Kaeli, K. B. Coletti, P. A. DiMilla, and R. Reisberg, “The impact of supplemental instruction on the performance of male and female engineers in a freshmen chemistry course,” in Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education 2015 Annual Conference and Exhibition, Seattle, WA, June 14-17, 2015.[3] M. C. Grillo and C. Leist, “Academic support as a predictor of retention to graduation: new insights on the role of tutoring, learning assistance, and supplemental instruction,” Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 387-408, 2013.[4] V. Fayowski and P
= 94) reported statistically significant lower engineering identity [t(394) = 2.14, p < 0.05], atthe end of the semester.Research Question 2. Does academic climate predict engineering identity in the sameway for women and men?We did a multiple regression analysis to see whether perceived academic climate and genderpredicted engineering identity after controlling the initial identity. The overall modelaccounted for a substantial amount of variance in engineering identity, R2=0.47 [F (4, 388) =85.01, p .05. The interaction of perceived climate and gender on engineering identity was also notsignificant, F(1, 392) = 0.00, p > .05.For female undergraduates, the perceived climate was a predictor of engineering identity,B=0.34, t=3.39, p<
1, pp. 11A5/21 - 11A5/29.48. Youngman, J.A. and Egelhoff, C.J., “Best Practices in Recruiting and Persistence of Underrepresented Minorities in Engineering: a 2002 Snapshot,” Proceedings of the 33rd Frontiers in Education Conference (2003), Volume 2, pp. F2D - 11-16.49. Beichner, R.J.; Saul, J.M.; Allain, R.J.; Deardorff, D.L.; Abbott, D.S., “Introduction to SCALE-UP: Student-Centered Activities for Large Enrollment University Physics,” Proceedings of the 97th ASEE Conference and Exposition (2000).50. Kampe, J.; Edmister, W.; Stimpson, M.; Matanin, B.; Martin, A.; Brozina, C.; and Watford, B., “Freshman Engineering Living-Learning Communities at Virginia Tech,” Proceedings of
article. As you read this article, you should review it with respect to the above student learning objective. Here are some questions about the reading that might help you with this article. a. What is the historical and social impact of Martha Stewart and how does it interact with the dimensions of race, class and gender? b. The author discusses the roles of work and family to be competing areas for women. How does the history of paid work versus unpaid work (housework) compare for women of different ethnic, cultural and class groups? c. The author compares the career of Martha Stewart and the career of Oprah Winfrey and
men. Although these figuresdiffer by field they have not substantially changed from 1993 to 2003. Figure 5(a) shows in of those women whoare married, more women scientists and engineers are married to full-time working spouses (US NationalAcademies, 2007)6. Figure 5(b) shows that 64% to 81% of women scientists and engineers marry fellowscientists and engineers (US National Academies, 2007)6.Figure 4. Percent of women and men doctoral scientists and engineers in tenured or tenure-track positions,by sex, marital status, and presence of children, 2003. 6 SOURCE: National Science Foundation (2003).Survey of Doctorate Recipients, 2003. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation
. Jenkins and J. Fink, Tracking Transfer: New Measures of Institutional and State Effectiveness in Helping Community College Students Attain Bachelor’s Degrees, Available: https://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/publications/tracking-transfer-institutional-state- effectiveness.html, 2016.10. The Education Trust, “Charting a necessary path: The baseline report of public higher education systems in the Access to Success Initiative,” 2009.11. K. Eagan, E. B. Stolzenberg, A.K. Bates, M. C. Aragon, M. R. Suchard, and C. Rios-Aguilar, The American Freshman: National Norms Fall 2015. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA, 2015.
were designed to guide the study in the exploration of the livedexperiences of eleven female students in an undergraduate engineering program. These questionsprovided a foundation for gaining a detailed understanding of how the participants made sense oftheir experiences and factors that were influential in their choice and persistence in engineering.1. How might choice and persistence take shape for women in an undergraduate engineering program? a. What roles do pre-college engineering-related learning experiences play in women’s choice of engineering as a major? b. How do women overcome social and cultural barriers in their persistence in an engineering program?ParticipantsThe recommended sample size for
, Utah State University, vol. 42, pp. 853‐859, 2008. [9] S. Lee, M. C. Harrison, G. Pell and C. L. Robinson, "Predicting Performance of First Year Engineering Students and the Importance of Assessment Tools Therein," Engineering Education, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 44‐51, 2008. [10] J. F. Milem and J. B. Berger, "A modified model of college student persistence: Eploring the relationship between Astin's theory of involvement and Tinto's theory of student departure," Journal of College Student Development, vol. 38, pp. 387‐400, 1997. [11] M. Oja, "Supplemental Instruction Improves Grades But Not Persistence," College Student Journal, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 344‐349, 2012. [12] D. Arendale, "Increasing efficiency and
AC 2009-705: HOW WE MEASURE SUCCESS MAKES A DIFFERENCE:EIGHT-SEMESTER PERSISTENCE AND GRADUATION RATES FOR FEMALEAND MALE ENGINEERING STUDENTSMatthew Ohland, Purdue University Matthew W. Ohland is an Associate Professor in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University and is the Past President of Tau Beta Pi, the engineering honor society. He received his Ph.D. in Civil Engineering from the University of Florida in 1996. Previously, he served as Assistant Director of the NSF-sponsored SUCCEED Engineering Education Coalition. He studies longitudinal student records in engineering education, team-member effectiveness, and the implementation of high-engagement teaching methods.Michelle
a, Kelly K, Carr K. Increasing Participation of Women in Cyber Security. In: 2012 ASEE SoutheastSection Conference. San Antonio, Tx: ASEE; 2012.11. Fuller A, Turbin J, Johnson B. Computer Club for Girls: The problem with seeing girls as the problem. Genderand Education. 2013;25(4):499–514.12. The Center for Women and Information Technology (CWIT). The Center for Women & InformationTechnology: Mentoring Tool Kit. Baltimore, MD; 2004. Page 26.437.10
the students as a strategy to fightcultural stereotypes. As Paty explained, Intelligence and abilities can be developed; it is not like what you are born with. No! [Abilities] can be developed and school helps. [La inteligencia y las habilidades se pueden desarrollar, no es como si naciste con ellas. ¡No!, se pueden desarrollar y la escuela ayuda].b) Challenging the Social Environment and Students’ Responses to the ChallengeThe second dimension of the challenging engineering environment identified by students issocial. Female students in engineering stated that they face an environment that is competitive,individualistic, and isolating. Additionally, students perceived that their workload led them tohave less time for
AC 2011-1956: INSTITUTIONAL ETHNOGRAPHY AS A METHOD TOUNDERSTAND THE CAREER AND PARENTAL LEAVE EXPERIENCESOF STEM FACULTY MEMBERSMarisol Mercado Santiago, Purdue University Marisol Mercado Santiago is a doctoral student in the School of Engineering Education, Purdue Univer- sity, and a research assistant in the Research in Feminist Engineering (RIFE) group. She has a M. E. in Computer Engineering and a B. S. in Computer Science (with honors). Among her research interests are (1) culturally responsive education, (2) engineering studies, and (3) art and engineering education. Address: School of Engineering Education, Armstrong Hall, 701 W. Stadium Ave., West Lafayette, IN 47907. mercado@purdue.edu.Alice L. Pawley
Paper ID #33259A Book Club Model to Promote Personal and Professional DevelopmentActivities for Female Engineering and Computer Science StudentsDr. Shelly Gulati , University of the Pacific Dr. Shelly Gulati is Associate Professor and Chair of Bioengineering. She is also serving as the Faculty Fellow, Academic Advising. She has been at Pacific since 2010. She received a BS in Chemical Engineer- ing from Johns Hopkins University and a PhD in Bioengineering from University of California, Berkeley. She also spent two years as a postdoctoral fellow in London at Imperial College. Dr. Gulati’s research expertise is
Raise awareness of subtle negative messages towards female STEM faculty. 4 Value and demonstrate transparency as a means of achieving equity. 5 Emphasize data-driven decision-making.Category B. Building Networks of Support and Information 6 Continue and enhance the faculty mentoring program. 7 Encourage informal networking among female STEM faculty. 8 Provide workshops for female STEM faculty.Category C. Supporting Work-Life Balance 9 Continue, clarify and enhance family-friendly policies.10 Improve and expand childcare resources, including the addition of lactation rooms.11 Consider creative solutions to dual-career situations.Category D. Other Strategies to Support Female STEM Faculty12 Support all STEM faculty, and
Engineering Congress and Exposition, 2007. 10. Etzkowtiz, H., Kemelgor, C., Neuschatz, M. and Uzzi. B., Athena unbound: Barriers to women in academic science and engineering. Science and Public Policy 19 (1992, 157– 179. Page 22.390.11 11. Bandura, A., Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1986.12. Lent, R.W., “Toward a unifying theoretical and practical perspective on well-being and psychosocial adjustment,” Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51 (2004), 482–509.13. Lent, R.W. and Brown, S.D., “Social Cognitive Career Theory and Subjective Well- Being in the
, throughout thepandemic, and hopefully into a post-COVID future. The COVID screener questions will beanalyzed in conjunction with other instruments in the survey (e.g. those measuring engineeringself-efficacy) to ultimately improve recruitment and retention of students in engineeringprograms, with a particular focus on increasing the participation rates of underrepresentedpopulations.References[1] M. Park, J. Park, K. Jackson and G. Vanhoy, "Online Engineering Education Under COVID-19 Pandemic Environment," International Journal of Multidisciplinary Perspectives in Higher Education, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 160-166, 2020.[2] B. Means and J. Neisler, "Suddently online: a national survey of undergraduates during the COVID-19 pandemic
AC 2012-4065: ACCESS AND DEFINITION: EXPLORING HOW STEMFACULTY, DEPARTMENT HEADS, AND UNIVERSITY POLICY ADMIN-ISTRATORS NAVIGATE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A PARENTAL LEAVEPOLICYMr. Corey Schimpf, Purdue University, West Lafayette Corey Schimpf is a Ph.D. student in engineering education with interests in leveraging virtual environ- ments for learning and using sociological thinking for human centered design.Ms. Marisol Mercado Santiago, Purdue University, West LafayetteDr. Alice L. Pawley, Purdue University Alice L. Pawley is an Assistant Professor in the School of Engineering Education and an affiliate faculty member in the Women’s Studies Program and the Division of Environmental and Ecological Engineer- ing at Purdue
friends, so we mostly had task division. What he did—he wasn’t calling me or they were just doing it and when I was asking he said, “Okay, don’t worry. We just done it. We went to the lab and we just finished it.” I got so mad and I went to the professor and said, “He doesn’t—just share those projects, because I have to get a grade, too.” He said, “You chose him as a leader, so you have to go take care of it.” I sent him a few e-mails and asked him, “Okay, you should just give me more tasks, you have to just make—” I don’t know; he just never did. For the second semester of capstone I got B, because our professor said, “I didn’t see you doing those electrical engineering things,” and I said
influencing the self-efficacy beliefs of first-year engineering students," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 95, pp. 39-47, 2006.[7] M. W. Ohland, S. D. Sheppard, G. Lichtenstein, O. Eris, D. Chachra, and R. A. Layton, "Persistence, engagement, and migration in engineering programs," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 97, pp. 259-278, 2008.[8] S. G. Brainard and L. Carlin, "A six-year longitudinal study of undergraduate women in engineering and science," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 87, pp. 369-375, 1998.[9] J. A. Raelin, M. B. Bailey, J. Hamann, L. K. Pendleton, R. Reisberg, and D. L. Whitman, "The gendered effect of cooperative education, contextual support, and self-efficacy on
Paper ID #28730Points of Departure. Understanding Gender Differences in FacultyTurnover Intentions at University of XDr. Robin O. Andreasen, University of Delaware Robin O. Andreasen (Ph.D. University of Wisconsin-Madison) is Associate Professor of Linguistics and Cognitive Science. She earned her PhD in philosophy and specializes in philosophy of science, philosophy of social science, and in science and policy. A race and gender scholar, Dr. Andreasen is research director and co-PI for UD’s ADVANCE-IT grant.Dr. Shawna Vican, University of Delaware Shawna Vican is an Assistant Professor of Sociology and Criminal Justice
, somewhat, not at all, N/A did not attend] 9. To what degree did your participation in the New Faculty Learning Community encourage you to seek funding for research? [very much, somewhat, not at all, N/A did not attend] 10. To what degree did your participation in the New Faculty Learning Community encourage you to seek further knowledge related to pedagogical techniques? [very much, somewhat, not at all, N/A did not attend] 11. a. Have you submitted a publication or grant proposal in the past two years? [yes, no] b. Have you implemented a new pedagogical technique in your class room over the last two years? [yes, no] c. To what degree did your participation in the New Faculty
-representation is the existence among secondary students of gender-specific perceptionsof: 1) the engineering profession and education programs; 2) the differences among engineeringdisciplines; 3) the typical engineering skill set; and, finally, 4) a student’s self-evaluation incomparison to this skill set.The goals of the first stage of this multistage project were to create a survey tool that: a) usedinclusive language (especially around gender), b) minimized the amount of bias in the surveylanguage, and c) was validated. The careful process undertaken in designing and validating thesurvey, including the consultation with multiple expert panels and cognitive interviews ofstudents, are detailed in this paper. The survey tool was used to evaluate our
seem particularly relevant to career development: (a) self-efficacy beliefs, (b)outcome expectations, and (c) goal representations.” Self-efficacy refers to “people’s judgmentsof their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated typesof performances.” 8, 9 These three authors further “define vocational interest as patterns of likes,dislikes, and indifferences regarding career-relevant activities and occupations.”10 Betz andHackett did a study on the relationship of career-related self-efficacy expectations to perceivedcareer options in college women and men.11 They found that females reported significantlyhigher levels of self-efficacy with regard to traditional female occupations and significantlylower
interest to explore possible differences andsimilarities of these findings for underrepresented minorities as well as socio-economic and otherpersonal attributes that might contribute to the decreased retention and GPAs of males lackingpre-matriculation college credit. Further attention towards programs designed to impact retentionbeyond the first and second years of study in engineering programs also may be warranted.References[1] T. B. Cole, E. Kaeli, B. J. Priem, C. Ghio, P. A. DiMilla, and R. Reisberg, “The influence of preconceptions, experience and gender on use of supplemental instruction and academic success in a freshman chemistry course for engineers,” in Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education 2018 Annual
Information [1] Holloway, B. M. and Reed-Rhoads, T., “Between Recruiting and Retention: A Study of Admissions Practices and their Impact on Women in Engineering,” in ASEE Global Colloquium on Engineering Education, Cape Town, South Africa, 2008.[2] Holloway, B. M., Imbrie, P. K. and Reed-Rhoads, T., “A Holistic Review of Gender Differences in Engineering Admissions and Early Retention,” in ICWES 15: The 15th International Conference for Women Engineers and Scientists, Australia, 2011.[3] Qualtrics, December 2013. [Online]. http://qualtrics.com/.[4] National Academy of Engineering, Changing the Conversation: Messages for Improving Public Understanding of Engineering, National Academies Press, 2008. [5] N. L. Fortenberry, J. F