skip to main content


Title: The AIBS IDEA Conference
The American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) is an umbrella organization of biological societies. In 2020, AIBS developed a plan to intentionally assess its current programs, as well as to develop and expand programs and policies to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the biological sciences. Therefore, AIBS decided, for the next 5 years, to focus its annual meeting of member societies and organizations, the AIBS Council Meeting, on topics related to DEI. In 2021, AIBS was funded by the National Science Foundation and received additional support from the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation for its expanded annual council meeting, Enabling Scientific Societies to Create Inclusive, Diverse, Equitable, and Accepting (IDEA) Environments. The IDEA conference was created to engage like-minded organizations committed to increasing diversity in the biological sciences. The conference consists of two meetings, an initial virtual 2-day meeting followed by a virtual 1.5-day workshop. The initial meeting included 27 scientific societies with representatives from five minority-serving scientific organizations. This meeting of the IDEA conference, held 4–5 November 2021, served as a call to action that would allow participants to come together to learn, plan, and strategize. This report provides details of the discussions around characteristics of IDEA environments, barriers to creating IDEA environments, strategies to overcome these barriers, and opportunities for action. The agenda can be found within the supplemental material.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2134480
NSF-PAR ID:
10337184
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ;
Editor(s):
Collins, Scott; Verdier, James
Date Published:
Journal Name:
BioScience
ISSN:
0006-3568
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Who and by what means do we ensure that engineering education evolves to meet the ever changing needs of our society? This and other papers presented by our research team at this conference offer our initial set of findings from an NSF sponsored collaborative study on engineering education reform. Organized around the notion of higher education governance and the practice of educational reform, our open-ended study is based on conducting semi-structured interviews at over three dozen universities and engineering professional societies and organizations, along with a handful of scholars engaged in engineering education research. Organized as a multi-site, multi-scale study, our goal is to document differences in perspectives and interest the exist across organizational levels and institutions, and to describe the coordination that occurs (or fails to occur) in engineering education given the distributed structure of the engineering profession. This paper offers for all engineering educators and administrators a qualitative and retrospective analysis of ABET EC 2000 and its implementation. The paper opens with a historical background on the Engineers Council for Professional Development (ECPD) and engineering accreditation; the rise of quantitative standards during the 1950s as a result of the push to implement an engineering science curriculum appropriate to the Cold War era; EC 2000 and its call for greater emphasis on professional skill sets amidst concerns about US manufacturing productivity and national competitiveness; the development of outcomes assessment and its implementation; and the successive negotiations about assessment practice and the training of both of program evaluators and assessment coordinators for the degree programs undergoing evaluation. It was these negotiations and the evolving practice of assessment that resulted in the latest set of changes in ABET engineering accreditation criteria (“1-7” versus “a-k”). To provide an insight into the origins of EC 2000, the “Gang of Six,” consisting of a group of individuals loyal to ABET who used the pressure exerted by external organizations, along with a shared rhetoric of national competitiveness to forge a common vision organized around the expanded emphasis on professional skill sets. It was also significant that the Gang of Six was aware of the fact that the regional accreditation agencies were already contemplating a shift towards outcomes assessment; several also had a background in industrial engineering. However, this resulted in an assessment protocol for EC 2000 that remained ambiguous about whether the stated learning outcomes (Criterion 3) was something faculty had to demonstrate for all of their students, or whether EC 2000’s main emphasis was continuous improvement. When it proved difficult to demonstrate learning outcomes on the part of all students, ABET itself began to place greater emphasis on total quality management and continuous process improvement (TQM/CPI). This gave institutions an opening to begin using increasingly limited and proximate measures for the “a-k” student outcomes as evidence of effort and improvement. In what social scientific terms would be described as “tactical” resistance to perceived oppressive structures, this enabled ABET coordinators and the faculty in charge of degree programs, many of whom had their own internal improvement processes, to begin referring to the a-k criteria as “difficult to achieve” and “ambiguous,” which they sometimes were. Inconsistencies in evaluation outcomes enabled those most discontented with the a-k student outcomes to use ABET’s own organizational processes to drive the latest revisions to EAC accreditation criteria, although the organization’s own process for member and stakeholder input ultimately restored much of the professional skill sets found in the original EC 2000 criteria. Other refinements were also made to the standard, including a new emphasis on diversity. This said, many within our interview population believe that EC 2000 had already achieved much of the changes it set out to achieve, especially with regards to broader professional skills such as communication, teamwork, and design. Regular faculty review of curricula is now also a more routine part of the engineering education landscape. While programs vary in their engagement with ABET, there are many who are skeptical about whether the new criteria will produce further improvements to their programs, with many arguing that their own internal processes are now the primary drivers for change. 
    more » « less
  2. To provide early career scientists with professional development related to science communication, we developed a full day workshop funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) entitledDeveloping the Science of Science Communication. This workshop has been funded since 2019 by NSF and presented in both virtual and in‐person formats. Because of the success of the virtual 2021 workshop and building upon foundations from prior years (in‐person in February 2019 and February 2020), a second virtual workshop was held in conjunction with the Ocean Sciences Meeting in January 2022. 2022 workshop attendees voluntarily participated in a full day virtual workshop comprised of verbal and visual communication skill sessions. In previous years, attendance was capped at 50 participants. In 2022, only 17 participants completed the pre‐workshop survey. The all‐day workshop included two presentation skills‐focused sessions and two poster design sessions. Participants overwhelmingly agreed that they (a) would recommend the workshop to others and (b) found the workshop content would be useful in their careers. The low attendance in 2022 is believed to be due to the virtual format combined with the timing of the workshop. In years prior, the workshop was held the day before the conference. This year, we attempted to hold the workshop 1 month prior to the conference to help students prepare in advance—we think most students simply had not prepared their presentations this far in advance. NSF has already funded an exciting future workshop structure for 2023. The workshop will be held across 2 days with a virtual “pre‐workshop” day for those who are ready and would like extra time and materials along with a second, in‐person workshop the day prior to the conference in Palma de Mallorca, Spain in conjunction with the June 2023 Aquatic Sciences Meeting.

     
    more » « less
  3. Abstract

    For many, 2020 was a year of abrupt professional and personal change. For the aquatic sciences community, many were adapting to virtual formats for conducting and sharing science, while simultaneously learning to live in a socially distanced world. Understandably, the aquatic sciences community postponed or canceled most in‐person scientific meetings. Still, many scientific communities either transitioned annual meetings to a virtual format or inaugurated new virtual meetings. Fortunately, increased use of video conferencing platforms, networking and communication applications, and a general comfort with conducting science virtually helped bring the in‐person meeting experience to scientists worldwide. Yet, the transition to conducting science virtually revealed new barriers to participation whereas others were lowered. The combined lessons learned from organizing a meeting constitute a necessary knowledge base that will prove useful, as virtual conferences are likely to continue in some form. To concentrate and synthesize these experiences, we showcase how six scientific societies and communities planned, organized, and conducted virtual meetings in 2020. With this consolidated information in hand, we look forward to a future, where scientific meetings embrace a virtual component, so to as help make science more inclusive and global.

     
    more » « less
  4. The emerging convergence research emphasizes integrating knowledge, methods, and expertise from different disciplines and forming novel frameworks to catalyze scientific discovery and innovation, not only multidisciplinary, but interdisciplinary and further transdisciplinary. Mechatronics matches this new trend of convergence engineering research for deep integration across disciplines such as mechanics, electronics, control theory, robotics, and production manufacturing, and is also inspired by its active means of addressing a specific challenge or opportunity for societal needs. The most current applications of mechatronics in automotive are e-mobility (electric vehicles, EV) and connected and autonomous vehicles (CAV); in manufacturing are robotics and smart-factory; and in aerospace are drones, unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), and advanced avionics. The growing mechatronics industries demand high quality workforces with multidiscipline knowledge and training. These workforces can come from the graduates of colleges and universities with updated curricula, or from labors returning to schools or taking new training programs. Graduate schools can prepare higher level workforces that can carry out fundamental research and explore new technologies in mechatronics. K-12 schools will also play an important role in fostering the next-decade workforces for all the STEM area. On the other hand, the development of mechatronics technologies improves the tools for teaching mechatronics as well. These new teaching tools include affordable microcontrollers and the peripherals such as Arduinos, and Raspberry Pi, desktop 3D printers, and virtual reality (VR). In this paper we present the working processes and activities of a current one-year ECR project funded by NSF organizing two workshops held by two institutes for improving workforce development environments specified in mechatronics. Each workshop is planned to be two days, where the first day will be dedicated to the topics of the current workforce situation in industry, the current pathways for workforces, conventional college and university workforce training, and K-12 STEM education preparation in mechatronics. The topics in the second day will be slightly different based on the expertise and locations of the two institutes. One will focus on the mechatronics technologies in production engineering for alternative energy and ground mobility, and the other will concentrate on aerospace, alternative energy, and the corresponding applications. Both workshops will also address the current technical development of teaching methods and tools for mechatronics. VR will be specially emphasized and demonstrated in the workshops if the facilities allow. Social impacts of mechatronics technology, expansion of diversity and participation of underrepresented groups will be discussed in the workshops. We expect to have the results of the workshops to present in the annual ASEE conference in June. 
    more » « less
  5. Meeting the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) requires innovations in education to build key competencies in all learners. Learning objectives for SDGs identified by UNESCO like the “Integrated problem-solving competency,” if integrated properly with high school curriculum, can contribute sustainable development solutions for Belize. Additionally, the 3rd international conference of SIDS http://www.sids2014.org) under the theme, “The sustainable development of small island developing states through genuine and durable partnerships,” stressed investment in education and training, including through partnerships with migrants and diaspora communities, with “concrete, focused, forward-looking and action oriented programmes.” The Sagicor Visionaries Challenge, a sustainability challenge launched by the Caribbean Examinations Council (CXC), the Caribbean Science Foundation, and the Ministries of Education across 12 Caribbean countries in 2012, represented an example of such a partnership that fostered many key competencies now needed for meeting the SDGs. It asked secondary school students in the Caribbean to identify a challenge facing their school and or community, propose a sustainable and innovative solution, and show how that solution uses Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) as well as got the support of the school community. For its inaugural year, teacher and student sensitization workshops were organized in each country. Teachers supervised the student projects with support from mentors who were either local or virtual, including many members of the Caribbean diaspora. 175 projects entered the competition, representing 900 students ranging in age from 11 to 19. Experience from the inaugural year, which saw Belize’s Bishop Martin Secondary emerge the regional challenge winner, demonstrated interest by young people of the Caribbean in many of the themes listed in the SIDS outcomes like climate change, sustainable energy, disaster risk reduction, sustainable oceans and seas, food security and nutrition, water and sanitation, sustainable transportation, sustainable consumption and production, and health and non-communicable diseases. Reflection on student projects from Belize from the 2013 challenge, as well as current examples of teacher led inquiry-based projects for CXC’s School Based Assessments (SBAs), offer multiple opportunities for ensuring reef to ridge sustainable development in Belize and the rest of the Caribbean. 
    more » « less