Concerns about family life push some students away from a career in science or lead them away from particular career paths within science. Religion has been shown to have an influence on individuals’ values concerning both family and work. This study uses data from a survey of U.S. graduate students in five science disciplines to estimate a structural equation model examining paths between religiosity, work and family values, and intent to pursue different careers within science. The analysis finds that religiosity is positively associated with the importance placed on family and, through this mediator, is associated with a lower intent to pursue research‐focused academic jobs and higher intent to pursue teaching‐focused academic jobs. We discuss the implications of these findings, particularly as the analysis shows that women and some racial and ethnic minority students are more religious than their male and white peers.
Because stereotyping affects individual assessments of ability and because of socializing experiences in the law, we argue that women and judges of color, while well‐credentialed, feel pressure to work harder than their white male peers to demonstrate their competence. Using an original dataset of published appellate court opinions from 2008–2016, we find that majority opinions authored by female and non‐white judges go farther to explain and justify their rulings, when compared to opinions written by white male peers. In comparison to other judges, opinions by white men are about 6% shorter, with 11% fewer citations, and 17% fewer extensively discussed citations. Our findings suggest that norms about crafting judicial opinions are gendered and racialized in ways that create higher workloads for women and judges of color.
more » « less- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10281687
- Publisher / Repository:
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Law & Society Review
- Volume:
- 55
- Issue:
- 3
- ISSN:
- 0023-9216
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 452-472
- Size(s):
- ["p. 452-472"]
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract -
more » « less
In this study, we drew on the m(ai)cro framework, which centers racism as a macrosystem, to examine how college-going emerging adults made meaning about society and themselves during the 2020 U.S. presidential election and 2021 inauguration. This period was marked by racial justice protests, a global pandemic, anti-Asian violence, and the storming of the U.S. Capitol by predominantly white Trump supporters. Using the constructs of critical consciousness and racial identity meaning making, we analyzed participants’ reports of recent race related conversations. Our sample included 47 students ( Mage = 19.71, SD = 1.72; 81% female, 17% male, 2% other; 45% Asian/Asian American, 30% white, 13% Latinx/Hispanic, 4% Black/African American, 4% Multiracial, 2% Middle Eastern/Arab) at a private, predominantly white university in the U.S. Midwest. Hybrid inductive-deductive analysis showed that a majority reported conversations with peers, focused primarily on racial inequity and justice. For many participants of color, conversations about topics including protests and anti-Asian violence were woven into their racial identities. In contrast, although many white participants discussed events such as the Capitol insurrection, none made links to their racial identities. Our findings highlight connections between critical consciousness and racial identity, and the importance of context and participant positionality in developmental research.
-
more » « less
Abstract Background Women and men of color and White women participate in American engineering education in lower proportions than they represent in the general U.S. population. Much existing engineering education research uses individual‐level (such as psychological) theories to explain this difference. The study reported here instead takes a structural perspective, asking how social relations are coordinated in engineering education.
Purpose This study explores how the intersection of ruling relations, critical race, and feminist theories can investigate how gender and race are built into engineering education's institutional structure.
Design/Method This study used interviews collected from 17 women and men of color and White women who were engineering undergraduate students at U.S. universities. The interviews were drawn from a project that takes as its premise that learning from such small numbers of students facilitates analyzing data intersectionally. The primary analysis used narrative methods through repeated readings.
Results I offer empirically based illustrations of ruling relations in U.S. universities and schools of engineering that unduly impact minoritized populations. These illustrations include discussions of financial aid knowledge, meeting the needs of transfer and Native students, and how schools crafting “the ideal student” as a young, single White male problematically impact minoritized students. The results illustrate how ruling relations structure engineering education in White‐ and male‐dominated ways.
Conclusions This paper offers questions to help readers consider how ruling relations race and gender their own institutions. In addition, it offers an interpretive, emergent method for interrogating institutional structure and ideas for future work using ruling relations in engineering education research.
-
null (Ed.)Engineering is in need of new ideas and innovations to keep up with the growing demands of infrastructure and technology of today’s world. Diversity of thought and experience is necessary for this need in engineering to be met. Women of color (WOC) offer a source of underutilized intellectual capital in engineering. However, despite efforts in engineering education, WOC remain underrepresented and underserved (Green, 2006) in engineering and the student body of most engineering programs in universities in the United States (Cross et al., 2017). Research has shown that a possible reason for WOC leaving the engineering field may be from experiences of hostility within the environment that is associated with intersectional identities (Cross et al., 2017; Cross & Paretti, 2012; Mendenhall et al., 2018). The intersectionality of race and gender for WOC, also known as the “double bind,” play a large role in their engineering education experiences (Malcolm, 1976; Malcom & Malcom, 2011). This intersectionality of multiple marginalized identities has a multiplicative (i.e., not additive) effect on the struggles to participate in STEM, which can increase the impact of the hostile chilly climate of engineering (Mendenhall et al., 2018; Ong et al., 2011; Ong, Jaumot-Pascual, & Ko, 2020). WOC must operate differently than their white, male and female counterparts because of their unwelcoming experiences during their engineering education. So, how does the double bind lead to a double standard in engineering? In this study, we seek to explore how the interrelated system of oppression previous scholars named the double standard (Foschi, Lai, & Sigerson, 1994; Foschi, 1996, 2000) operate within engineering education and how the double bind WOC experience impacts this system of oppression. Foschi (2000) defines the double standard as “the use of different requirements for the inference of possession of an attribute, depending on the individuals being assessed” (p. 21). That is to say, inconsistent and unspoken performance criteria exist within engineering and WOC may be held to different standards based on negative stereotypes or bias beyond what their white male or female counterparts are held. In this work, this definition served to examine the double standards in educational and professional settings with “competence in task groups” (p. 21). We operationalize the double standard in this study to be a set of principles produced by the false notion of meritocracy and unacknowledged bias in engineering that serve to benefit the majority student population while simultaneously excluding or ignoring traditionally underserved minority (TUM) populations.more » « less
-
Designing a Curriculum to Broaden Middle School Students’ Ideas and Interest in Engineering As the 21st century progresses, engineers will play critical roles in addressing complex societal problems such as climate change and nutrient pollution. Research has shown that more diverse teams lead to more creative and effective solutions (Smith-Doerr et al., 2017). However, while some progress has been made in increasing the number of women and people of color, 83% of employed engineers are male and 68% of engineers are white (NSF & NCSES, 2019). Traditional K–12 approaches to engineering often emphasize construction using a trial-and-error approach (ASEE, 2020). Although this approach may appeal to some students, it may alienate other students who then view engineering simply as “building things.” Designing engineering experiences that broaden students’ ideas about engineering, may help diversify the students entering the engineering pipeline. To this end, we developed Solving Community Problems with Engineering (SCoPE), an engineering curriculum that engages seventh-grade students in a three-week capstone project focusing on nutrient pollution in their local watershed. SCoPE engages students with the problem through local news articles about nutrient pollution and images of algae covered lakes, which then drives the investigation into the detrimental processes caused by excess nutrients entering bodies of water from sources such as fertilizer and wastewater. Students research the sources of nutrient pollution and potential solutions, and use simulations to investigate key variables and optimize the types of strategies for effectively decreasing and managing nutrient pollution to help develop their plans. Throughout the development process, we worked with a middle school STEM teacher to ensure the unit builds upon the science curriculum and the activities would be engaging and meaningful to students. The problem and location were chosen to illustrate that engineers can solve problems relevant to rural communities. Since people in rural locations tend to remain very connected to their communities throughout their lives, it is important to illustrate that engineering could be a relevant and viable career near home. The SCoPE curriculum was piloted with two teachers and 147 seventh grade students in a rural public school. Surveys and student drawings of engineers before and after implementation of the curriculum were used to characterize changes in students’ interest and beliefs about engineering. After completing the SCoPE curriculum, students’ ideas about engineers’ activities and the types of problems they solve were broadened. Students were 53% more likely to believe that engineers can protect the environment and 23% more likely to believe that they can identify problems in the community to solve (p < 0.001). When asked to draw an engineer, students were 1.3 times more likely to include nature/environment/agriculture (p < 0.01) and 3 times more likely to show engineers helping people in the community (p< 0.05) Additionally, while boys’ interest in science and engineering did not significantly change, girls’ interest in engineering and confidence in becoming an engineer significantly increased (Cohen’s D = 0.28, p<0.05). The SCoPE curriculum is available on PBS LearningMedia: https://www.pbslearningmedia.org/collection/solving-community-problems-with-engineering/ This project was funded by NSF through the Division of Engineering Education and Centers, Research in the Formation of Engineers program #202076. References American Society for Engineering Education. (2020). Framework for P-12 Engineering Learning. Washington, DC. DOI: 10.18260/1-100-1153 National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2019). Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2019. Special Report NSF 17-310. Arlington, VA. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf21321/. Smith-Doerr, L., Alegria, S., & Sacco, T. (2017). How Diversity Matters in the US Science and Engineering Workforce: A Critical Review Considering Integration in Teams, Fields, and Organizational Contexts, Engaging Science, Technology, and Society 3, 139-153.more » « less
