Thiyagarajah, M., & Crippen, K., & Carroll, B., & Johns, T. (2022, August), Should Professional Engineering Identity be the only Identity Considered when Developing Programs?  Paper presented at 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Minneapolis, MN. 10.18260/1-2--41141

\bibitem{asee_peer_41141}
  Thiyagarajah, M., \& Crippen, K., \& Carroll, B., \& Johns, T. (2022, August), \emph{Should Professional Engineering Identity be the only Identity Considered when Developing Programs?}
  Paper presented at 2022 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Minneapolis, MN.
  10.18260/1-2--41141

Meena Thiyagarajah, Kent Crippen, Bruce Carroll, and Tracy Johns.  "Should Professional Engineering Identity be the only Identity Considered when Developing Programs?".  2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Minneapolis, MN, 2022, August.  ASEE Conferences, 2022.  https://peer.asee.org/41141 Internet.  25 Apr, 2024

\bibitem{asee_peer_41141}
  Meena Thiyagarajah, Kent Crippen, Bruce Carroll, and Tracy Johns.
  "Should Professional Engineering Identity be the only Identity Considered when Developing Programs?".
  \emph{2022 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Minneapolis, MN, 2022, August}.
  ASEE Conferences, 2022.
  https://peer.asee.org/41141 Internet.  25 Apr, 2024

@INPROCEEDINGS{asee_peer_41141
author = "Meena Thiyagarajah, Kent Crippen, Bruce Carroll, and Tracy Johns"
title = "Should Professional Engineering Identity be the only Identity Considered when Developing Programs?"
booktitle = "2022 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition"
year = "2022"
month = "August"
address = "Minneapolis, MN"
publisher = "ASEE Conferences"
note = {https://peer.asee.org/41141}
number = {10.18260/1-2--41141}
}

TY  - CPAPER
AB  - Should Professional Engineering Identity be the only Identity Considered when Developing Programs?  

Paper Type: Work In Progress (WIP).

The narrative construction of one’s identity—the various ways a person sees themself—is
recognized as a continually evolving, multifaceted process based upon an inner dialog. Identity is
recognized as a precursor to motivation. Both identity and motivation support persistence in
engineering. Professional identity, in the case of undergraduate students viewing themselves as a
professional engineer, is not an intentionally facilitated process, rather an individual construction
of the profession’s duties, responsibilities, and know-how. Some institutions are revising their
undergraduate curriculum based upon explicitly promoting professional identity development.
This study involves a systematic review of published studies in this genre to determine thematic
attributes associated with cultivating professional identity. We sought to synthesize idiographic
findings from peer-reviewed studies from 2019 through 2021 that used qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methodologies. 
Our results indicate a general focus on the early development of a
professional identity, where recognizing multiple selves (i.e., identities), including gendered
differences lend insight on how to effectively construct a personalized engineering profile for
students specific to the engineering discipline.

Although trajectories of change in identity during the first year on a college campus are
important predictors of retention and persistence, extant literature provides little explanation for
how an individual’s “engineering identity” transforms from the onset-precollege, during college,
through graduation, and finally when delving into a professional career. The varied singular focused structured
frameworks on engineering identity formation results in a simplistic description of engineering
students following a pattern of “foreclosure in relation to the individual experience of their
identities.”

Students are required to commit to a discipline early in college and are thus compelled to commit
to a particular identity. This fragile connection in the absence of a sense of belonging within
fixed parameters can easily be broken. There are also several fundamental categories for identity
formation such as space, performance, communication, exposure to role models, institutional
identity, affinity identity, perception, and affective ability.

Early-onset findings indicate females identify more with multiple identities and have a stronger
sense of this when entering engineering, unlike their male counterparts. Thus, examining gender
differences during identity construction and implications in male-dominated professions, in
particular, is important to personalize identity formation to develop a deep sense of belonging
and relation. The ability to relate grounds the sense of belief and allows individuals to feel
secure; coupling this with experiences in the workplace further solidifies this identity. Since
identity development is dialogic and social, engineering curriculum coupled with effective
communication plays a key role in fostering a sense of belonging by attending to how the
pathway to graduation might cultivate relational experiences. Support for identity development
should involve a dynamic individualized approach; one that is tailored to adjust as the individual
matures during the pursuit of the degree through graduation and beyond. Understanding these
constructs and how these identities intersect and differ from each other at different stages of
development is important in moving processes and programs forward that support student
advising, mentoring, and ultimately retention and success.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords - Engineering Identity, Engineering Identity development, Gender, Intersectional
Identity, Multiple selves
(Word count excluding keywords and title is 498)
AU  - Meena Thiyagarajah
AU  - Kent Crippen
AU  - Bruce Carroll
AU  - Tracy Johns
CY  - Minneapolis, MN
DA  - 2022/08/23
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Should Professional Engineering Identity be the only Identity Considered when Developing Programs?
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/41141
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--41141
ER  -