- Award ID(s):
- 1936778
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10382972
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
Teamwork is critical to engineering professional work. While some aspects of teaming with engineering students are well understood and implemented into instructional tools, tools for handling student teams dealing with implicit and explicit racism, sexism, and homophobia are infrequent. Instructors of large undergraduate courses need tools to help make team-level marginalization visible at the classroom level to interrupt discriminatory or marginalizing behavior amongst teammates, and to model allyship so teammates learn how to interrupt others' marginalizing behavior when instructors are not around. This paper describes the broader project, and describes some early results, focused on an algorithm that can help identify teams engaging in marginalizing behaviors against minoritized students, whether minoritized by race, gender, nationality, LGBTQ identity, or other categorization schemes. We describe how the algorithm is proving useful to identify student teams to focus on for analysis to answer some of our research questions focused on how engineering undergraduate teams marginalize minoritized members, and illustrate one such analysis. We describe our continuing work on the broader project.more » « less
-
Abstract Background Teamwork has become a central element of engineering education. However, the race‐ and gender‐based marginalization prevalent in society is also prevalent in engineering student teams. These problematic dynamics limit learning opportunities, isolate historically marginalized students, and ultimately push students away from engineering, further reinforcing the demographic imbalances in the profession.
Purpose While there are strategies to improve the experiences of marginalized students within teams, there are few tools for detecting marginalizing behaviors as they occur. The purpose of this work is to examine how peer evaluations collected as a normal part of an engineering course can be used as a window into team dynamics to reveal marginalization as it occurs.
Method We used a semester of peer evaluation data from a large engineering course in which a team project is the central assignment and peer evaluation occurs four times during the course. We designed an algorithm to identify teams where marginalization may be occurring. We then performed qualitative analyses using a sociolinguistic analysis.
Results Results show that the algorithm helps identify teams where marginalization occurs. Qualitative analyses of four illustrative cases demonstrated the stealth appearance and evolution of marginalization, providing strong evidence that hidden within language of peer evaluation are indicators of marginalization. Based on the wider dataset, we present a taxonomy (eight categories) of linguistic marginalization appearing in peer comments.
Conclusion Both peer evaluation scores and the language used in peer evaluations can reveal team inequities and may serve as a near‐real‐time mechanism to interrupt marginalization within engineering teams.
-
This full paper interrogates the perceptions of mentoring of international STEM doctoral faculty at US universities. International faculty comprise the second largest STEM faculty population in the US, yet little is known about their perceptions surrounding mentoring. Literature informs on the importance of cross-cultural mentoring which is impacted by various factors especially sociocultural and sociopolitical concerns. As a result of the miniscule number of Black and Brown STEM faculty at US institutions, most US underrepresented racially minoritized students have doctoral faculty mentors who are either White or international. These students are negatively impacted when these cross-cultural mentorships fail to be culturally liberative. A qualitative case study using interviewing as method was employed to better understand the perspectives of international faculty teaching in US STEM doctoral programs. Using inductive constant comparative analysis, the study identified three patterns relative to STEM doctoral mentoring by international faculty: focus on pragmatics, science culture as race and culture neutral, and limited ability to empathize with the marginalization of "the other" in spite of marginalization as international faculty. Three implications were developed based on the findings. STEM doctoral education should reimagine mentoring as holistic, embedded in and accountable to cultural understanding, international faculty should draw on their own experiences of marginalization to connect with and better respond to the needs of racially minoritized US STEM doctoral students and international faculty should engage in anti-racism and anti-Black racism training to become aware of ways in which implicit bias and lack of cultural knowledge infiltrates mentoring practice.more » « less
-
Teaching engineering students how to work in teams is necessary, important, and hard to do well. Minoritized students experience forms of marginalization from their teammates routinely, which affects their access to safe learning environments. Team evaluation tools like CATME can help instructors see where teaming problems are, but are often normed in ways that obscure the subtle if pervasive harassment of minoritized teammates. Instructors, particularly of large courses, need better ways to identify teams that are marginalizing minoritized team members. This paper introduces theory on microaggressions, selective incivility theory, and coded language to interpret data collected from a complex study site during the COVID-19 pandemic. The team collected data from classroom observations (moved virtual during COVID), interviews with instructors, interviews with students, interpretations of historical data collected through an online team evaluation tool called CATME, and a diary study where students documented their reflections on their marginalization by teammates. While data collection and analysis did not, of course, go as the research team had planned, it yielded insights into how frequently minoritized teammates experience marginalization, instructors’ sense of their responsibility and skill for addressing such, marginalization, and students’ sense of defeat in hoping for more equitable and supportive learning environments. The paper describes our data collection processes, analysis, and some choice insights drawn from this multi-year study at a large, research-extensive white university.more » « less
-
Against a backdrop of calls for increased access and participation in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) in the United States have emerged as critical access points for Latina/o/x and other Students of Color. Federal grants can become important levers for building institutional capacity for broadening participation in STEM and transforming HSIs toward better serving Students of Color, specifically as it relates to curricula and pedagogy. In this study, we focus on the engineering faculty at an HSI who are participants in a National Science Foundation-funded, equity-focused professional development program. Operationalizing Bonilla-Silva’s color-evasive racial ideology framework, we use content analysis techniques to explore how engineering faculty discuss race and racism as part of the professional development experience. First, we find that engineering faculty largely rely on color-evasive racial frameworks (i.e., abstract liberalism, minimization of racism) when describing their motivations for participating in the program. Moreover, we find that engineering faculty responses depict a range of surprise and familiarity when reflecting on issues of race and racism. Finally, regardless of prior exposure to module concepts, at the end of the program, the majority of action projects reflect a recognition of race and racism as important.more » « less