offer more supportivelearning environment for women engineering students.The literature identifies various reasons for the low female representation in engineering andhigh dropout rates of female students in this field. Previous research shows that the majority ofthis student attrition occurs during the first year, making this a critical period for intervention.This paper aims to explore the perspectives and reflections of first-year women engineeringstudents to uncover the gender challenges they face and provide insights to improve womenretention and inclusivity in engineering programs along with discussion on how intervention inthe first-year engineering program improved student retention rates at University of Arkansas.The First-Year
Paper ID #44271Building Research, Teamwork and Professional Skills in an Engineering SummerBridge Program: Reflections Towards an Allyship ModelProf. Kavitha Chandra, University of Massachusetts, Lowell Kavitha Chandra is the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Affairs and Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering in the Francis College of Engineering at the University of Massachusetts Lowell. She directs the Research, Academics and Mentoring Pathways (RAMP) to Success summer bridge and academic program for new engineering students, preparing them with research, communication and leadership skills. Her research
Paper ID #42176Board 180: Impacting Engineering Students’ Perceptions of DEI ThroughReal-Life Narratives and In-Class Discussions with an Empathetic LensProf. Lisa K Davids, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University To continually improve the experience of the students in her courses, Lisa engages in applied pedagogical research, implementing research-based techniques in the classroom. Currently teaching Introduction to Engineering and Graphical Communications courses, Lisa has implemented active teaching techniques, team and project-based assignments, and emphasizes self-reflection in her students.Dr. Jeff R. Brown, Embry-Riddle
reality and is characterized by varied factorsthat influence this gap to continue, even with the efforts of private, public, social, andeducational initiatives to reduce it. Among the factors are the preconceptions in relation toSTEM careers, gender stereotypes, family attitudes, lack of women leaders in these areas whoare an example to inspire or to mentorship. The lack of gender equity for women inengineering is a global problem that has implications for society, as it means losing theopportunity to have this talent that is in such high demand today. [6]This context that gives us the environment leads us to reflect on the initiatives that are beingcarried out globally to further promote and create this culture of gender equality, where
learning is widely accepted as an integral part of engineeringeducation, as these experiences have been shown to improve students’ vocational self-conceptand work self-efficacy, as well as provide higher starting salaries post-graduation [10-11]. In thecontext of this study, enrolment in the program may signal students’ intent to be part of theengineering profession, or at least to obtain some professional experience in the field of theirdegree. However, given that the students are in their first year, we assume that they remain at anearly stage of professional socialization. Therefore, their expectations for the profession and theirown career trajectories may reflect their implicit assumptions about engineering and serve as abaseline for future
, with potential for broaderapplication across institutions.IntroductionComputing and technology occupations are predicted to rise by 7.3% in the next decade,outpacing the national average grow rate of 4.8% [1]. Along with a skilled workforce, theindustry needs to maintain a diverse workforce reflecting the community. Currently only 25.8%of computer and mathematical occupations employees are women. Among those, only 23.1% areAsian, 8.7% are Black/African American, and 7.8% are Hispanic/Latinx [2].Black women alone comprise 7% of the U.S. population [3] and yet make up only 0.5% ofcomputer science degrees awarded [4] and just 3% of computing professionals [5]. Black womenalso face specific barriers from just being black and a woman. [6], [7], [8
disparities in educational opportunities) [3], [8], [10]–[14], [16], [17], [19],[23]. Following this lecture, the students further engaged with the material outside of class byviewing the movie “Picture a Scientist” and listening to a recording of an episode from ThisAmerican Life entitled “The Problem We All Live With.” These multimedia resources werechosen since they reinforced the topics discussed in the in-class lectures through emotivepersonal examples and provided supporting data on gender and racial barriers in education andscience. The students additionally processed the information presented in the lecture as well asthe multimedia material by submitting a reflection on the content as a course assignment.Approximately midway through the
. The online survey consisted of chiefly multiple-choice questions, including ninedemographic questions, twelve situational reflective questions, twenty-six library use questions,and seven programmatic questions (outlined in Appendix V). The survey produced qualitativeand quantitative data, each considered separately. Campuses were considered individually and inaggregate. Qualitative metrics were analyzed using iStats software in Qualtrics. The analysis didnot present significant differences in demographic responses between different campuses,supporting our theory that separate campus libraries could be considered together. Campuses that did not meet response thresholds for statistically significant results wereexcluded from relational
workshop ended with a reflection and an energy andappreciation exercise. The workshop primarily employed negative brainstorming techniquesillustrated in The Idea Agent [10] and therefore the session was titled ‘How to make engineeringprograms worse for female engineering students.”The researcher developed an agenda and workshop documents that included an event flyer, theworkshop process, the workshop rules, a positive focus area worksheet, a four-field matrix, anenrichment tool, and instructions for the ten-thousand rose finale. These documents will bediscussed in detail, but are also included in Appendix A.The agenda for the 2-hour workshop is presented below: • Introduction (Workshop Rules) (10 minutes) • Positive Focus Area
that these events are deeply embedded in the intersectionalidentities of the authors and these accounts may not necessarily translate to other individualsundergoing similar situations. Also, because these challenges are layered, complex, and situatedin the authors’ intersectional identities, the findings may include multiple systemic barriers thatare intertwined in the interpretation of the findings. The authors opted to maintain the complexityof the narration as it was deemed more authentic to their lived working and personal realities.Further, the multilayered complexity in the narrative demonstrates the levels of cognitive loadand role strain associated with each presented challenge, subsequent reflection/decision, andperceived outcome. The
these, 1,165 records were removed as they did not meet the basic criteria, including 240 works outside the ASEE collection, 915 not belonging to the WIED division, and 10 from sessions unrelated to WIED. 2. Screening: A total of 361 records were screened in detail. Eight additional records were excluded as they were part of panel sessions. 3. Eligibility: From the remaining 353 records, 16 were manually excluded. This included nine posters not indexed in Scopus and seven posters from years outside the analysis scope.Finally, 337 works met the inclusion criteria and were selected for systematic review. Thisrigorous process ensures that the results reflect a comprehensive and accurate overview of thestudies published
(WIED) at ASEE convened a panel of current graduate students andpostdoctoral scholars to discuss visions of gender equity in engineering 130 years from now, whereall gender identities feel respected, experience gender equity, and are able to maintain a healthywork-life balance. The panelists reflected on their experiences on advancing womxn and genderequity in engineering, envisioned the progress that should be made in the coming 130 years, andshared ideas on how to achieve those visions, focusing on how dualistic thinking around genderand cis-normativity serve to marginalize womxn in engineering’s learning environments andworkplaces, as well as the critical ways that racial identity and gender intersect in womxn of colors’experiences
. Participants who had not completed the survey were reminded twiceby email before the survey closed two weeks after distribution.Participants were directed to the mentee (FYE) or mentor (sophomore, junior, senior) questionsbased on the academic classification they chose in the survey. Both the content and logic of thesequestion sets were identical except for the use of the terms “mentee” and ’“mentor” as appropriate.See Appendix A for the complete survey.Participants were asked to identify their “ideal” counterpart based on a personality descriptionindex originally provided in the paired mentoring program application. In the application, par-ticipants were asked to select the description that most reflected their personality (See AppendixA, question 6
specific goals were twofold: a) to providea reflective perspective on participants' institutional experiences related to gender, equality, androles within the School of Engineering, and b) to shed light on the challenges and barriersencountered in institutional life. Data was collected using the LEGO® Serious Play®methodology as an innovative and dialogic facilitation method. Twenty students and professorsparticipated. A phenomenological and qualitative analysis was conducted on the workshoprecordings to discern emerging perspectives. The results of the initial pilot workshops highlightthe significance that gender equality holds for both students and faculty within the realm ofuniversity education, as it is seen as the heart of institutional life
populated by male students. Among the faculty members present was the First-Year Engineering Programs Coordinator, who posed questions about the program and soughtsuggestions on how OWISE and other faculty members could enhance and support their first-year experience.The students expressed positive reflections on their first year but highlighted certain aspects ofthe course that felt intimidating. Many shared their experiences of entering classespredominantly composed of male students, feeling overwhelmed and uncertain about where tosit—a notable departure from their high school environments. Additionally, they conveyedfeelings of under-confidence and intimidation, particularly when dealing with fabricationequipment used in the courses. There was a
industry as a Product Development Engineer for a commercial roofing manufacturer. She holds a bachelors degree from the University of Tennessee in Materials Science and Engineering. She earned her PhD from the University of Pennsylvania, where her thesis topic was Nanoparticle Diffusion in Polymer Networks. Her research interests include polymer physics, nanoparticle diffusion, and engineering and physics education.Bobette Bouton Dr. Bobette Bouton is an associate professor at Austin Peay State University. Her current area of research is socio-emotional development in the domain of empathy. She is a Deweyan Pragmatist who focuses on student-centered teaching and reflection. She also is working toward making higher
educationand careers, including biases in hiring, career progression, and workplace culture [7], [8].Women in engineering often experience microaggressions, exclusion from networkingopportunities, and a lack of advancement into leadership roles, further discouraging long-term persistence in the field [9], [10]. Additionally, nearly 40% of female engineeringgraduates leave the profession within five years, often citing workplace culture, lack ofmentorship, and career stagnation as key factors [11], [12].At Union College, female enrollment in engineering programs reflects the national genderdisparity. Biomedical engineering leads with an average female enrollment of 58%, followedby electrical engineering (26%), computer engineering (19%), and mechanical
elements that Latinas,as women and engineering students, face in their search for a place in engineering. There aremultiple socio-emotional, economic, cultural, and academic aspects to consider in facilitatingLatina engineering students to develop interest, persist throughout, and gain confidence.MethodsThis is a qualitative one-shot case longitudinal study that explores a phenomenon in depth withinits real-world context. There was no control group to compare the effectiveness of the ROLEprogram. Women participants pursuing engineering degrees reflected on the importance ofprograms like ROLE that helped them reinforce their self-confidence as students interested inengineering. Participants took part in a set of interviews, in the first month of
applied when defining problems, craftingand evaluating possible solutions, and responding to crises. On presidential teams, the expressivefunction involves providing mutual support, offering counsel, and reflecting campus perspectivesso that the president understands how others see them. Here we adapt Bensimon and Neumann’sfunctions to center on the change project itself instead of on a singular leader; thus, theexpressive function includes work to refine and articulate the project messaging, communicatewith stakeholders, find common cause with other organizational allies, and manage resistance tothe project or its goals. Providing mutual support among the change team members is stillimportant, especially in the face of resistance. In Table 1 we
engineering?BackgroundPrior work has demonstrated that higher education and engineering education more narrowly arecomplex systems [13], [14] in which individual and collective actions cannot be predicted, butdrive the behavior of the system [15]. Complex systems are composed of multiple elementswhich interact dynamically with their environment, develop over time, and are characterized byuncertainty and complex causal relationships [15-19]. Elements of a complex system cannot beunderstood independently because interactions between the elements result in emergentbehaviors that need to acknowledge the interdependence of elements [20], [21]. There is a needfor systemic and transformational change in engineering higher education, reflected by
engineers face when trying to earn their professional engineering license. Her MASc research focuses on understanding how Canadian engineers reflect on the impact that their social location has had on their career.Sasha-Ann Eleanor Nixon, University of Toronto ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Are Hardhats Required for Engineering Identity Construction? Gendered and Racialized Patterns in Canadian Engineering Graduates’ Professional IdentitiesAbstractDespite ongoing efforts to increase diversity in engineering, women continue to beunderrepresented in the field, making up only 15% of licensed professional engineers in Canada[1]. This persistent
6 29Survey participants 20 17 16 53a) Demographics of participating facultyOf the total 99 CSU engineering faculty/lecturers who attended these mentoring events, fifty-three responded to the post event survey and are reflected in the following analysis. Figure 1shows the respondent demographics based on gender and US born (USB) versus FB/FT status.Note that while FB and FT status are separate identities, all but one FB respondent were also FT.Similarly, all but one USB respondent were entirely US trained. Therefore, the four possiblecombinations of birth location and training location are reduced to USB and FB/FT, in whichparticipants who had either FB or FT status
fostering diversity, but few studies [5], [6] dig deeply into the specificchallenges and aspirations of women in engineering programs within these institutions. Addressingthis gap is essential to tailoring interventions and policies that reflect the unique needs andstrengths of this demographic.The findings of this work have implications that extend beyond academic inquiry. Insights gainedfrom this research can inform institutional policies at HBCUs by highlighting the importance ofmentorship, community support, and targeted interventions to enhance retention and successamong women in engineering. These findings could bring about broader diversity and inclusionefforts within engineering education, contributing to a more innovative and
3.09 3.05 2.93 2.98 3.41 3.24 2.88 3.59 2.98 3.29 3.00 Diversity and inclusion 3.03 2.77 3.20 2.93 3.30 3.07 2.96 3.51 2.94 3.13 3.02 Study skills 2.98 3.02 2.73 2.95 3.09 3.20 2.74 3.56 2.87 3.29 2.87 Figure 6. Topics of interest by gender identity and subgroups of women.3.2.1 Topics of Interest for Women by SubgroupSignificant differences emerged between undergraduate and graduate women reflecting theirdiffering
environments, systematic barriers, or other factors may limit or negate REM andwomen students’ ability to effectively engage with these spaces. While countless studies point to the manybenefits of Makerspace engagement[2]–[4], [6], [7], no work has studied how these benefits are inequitablydistributed based on race or gender, or what interventions may be needed to ensure Makerspaceenvironments foster a sense of belonging amongst REM and women students.In professions that are significantly gendered and raced, any “otherness” affects the ways in which womenand/or REMs are treated with respect to their technical capabilities[9]. This is particularly true inengineering, which is predominantly White and male [10].The purpose of this paper is to reflect on
WiSTEM is theobservation that Black women are underrepresented in STEM for a variety ofreasons that include (1) anxiety pertaining to mathematics and computing (2) a lackof exposure to STEM disciplines and tangential careers (3) a lack of exposure toculturally responsive pedagogy, and (4) a lack of communities of support. Key Words - STEM Identity, Sense of Belonging, Persistence, Community, Self AwarenessINTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM STATEMENTMany institutions of higher education in the US do not reflect the racial and ethnicdiversity of our nation amongst its degree recipients. Clearly, we must acknowledgethe barriers to STEM education for individuals underrepresented in these disciplinesand develop interventions to mitigate them [1]–[3]. Racial
Education from Virginia Tech. She has work eDr. Michelle Soledad, Virginia Tech Michelle Soledad, Ph.D. is a Collegiate Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. Her research and service interests include teaching and learning experiences in fun- damental engineering courses, faculty development and support initiatives – including programs for the future engineering professoriate, and leveraging institutional data to support reflective teaching practices. She has degrees in Electrical Engineering (B.S., M.Eng.) from the Ateneo de Davao University in Davao City, Philippines, where she previously held appointments as Assistant Professor and Department Chair for Electrical Engineering
of educational strategies— such asexperiential learning opportunities, events, internships, and first-year experiences—have beenshown to significantly benefit undergraduate student learning, engagement, learning, andretention [5]. For instance, high-impact programs significantly help learners reflect on theircharacter strengths and weaknesses and allow them to take control of their successes as learnersand engineering professionals [5].Although evidence demonstrates that leadership development programs commonly described asexpanding the collective capacity of organizational members enable groups of individuals towork together and engage effectively in a meaningful way both in leadership roles andprocesses, [6] they can also lead to a
having high academicexpectations. Participants mentioned how their parents hold high academic expectations bywanting straight A's, pushing them to have extracurricular activities, and prioritizing theireducation. As an example, one participant mentioned, “They definitely set a standard when I wasin high school and of course when I got to college." This reflects the authoritative tendency to 9establish high standards while being responsive. It was also common for parents to be highlysupportive by assisting with homework, involving themselves in school selection, and supportingeducational goals. This pattern of high expectations paired with high
the podium computer and starts the projector. The lab's structure was that UTAs spread around the classroom and assisted students with their coding practice. Students would raise their hands to get the UTAs' attention. Instructors also train UTAs to be proactive, ensure the group dynamic is going smoothly, and initiate questions if the group or an individual member has challenges. Figure 4 - UTAs walking around the students' tables and helping students.Figure 4 shows two female and two male UTAs, and the instructor interacted with students ateach table as they collaborated on coding and problem-solving tasks. Our observation noted thatthe students' table conversation and facial expressions reflect comfort