More Like this

1. Solidarity as Resistance: Feminist Administrators in U.S. Academia

   https://doi.org/10.1177/23294965231221788  

   De_Welde, K ; Ollilainen, M ; Solomon, C R ( December 2023 , Social Currents)

   This study examines how feminist academic administrators engender solidarity and practice feminist principles as leaders in United States higher education institutions. We draw from qualitative interview data with 27 self-identified feminist academic leaders about how they carry out this work, what obstacles they face, and the ways that their work disrupts—and is disrupted by—the intensifying neoliberal, managerial tendencies in higher education. Respondents shared experiences of promoting solidarity through their leadership and strove to create inclusive and equitable environments to benefit students, staff, and faculty, and especially minoritized individuals within these groups. Our analysis reveals how these feminist administrators applied a feminist ethic, engendered solidarity in their work, and were often keenly aware of—and willing to contest—the neoliberal context of their institutions and higher education more broadly. Our findings contribute to the sociological and cross-disciplinary literature on feminist leaders in academic institutions and the resistance against neoliberalism and managerialism practices from within academia. 

   more » « less
2. Constructing a comprehensive and adaptive survey for cultural analysis of engineering departments

   Berger, E. ; Briody, E. ; DeBoer, J. ; Rhoads, J. ; Francis, J. ; Witek, L. ; Rothstein, R. ; Lee, Y. ( December 2021 , Proceedings of REES AAEE 2021)

   ABSTRACT CONTEXT Culture influences the dynamics and outcomes of organizations in profound ways, including individual-level outcomes (like the quality of work products) and collective impacts (such as reputation or influence). As such, understanding organizational culture is a crucial element of understanding performance; from an anthropological perspective, ‘performance’ is not an outcome of culture, it is a part of culture. A key challenge in understanding organizational culture, especially in complex academic organizations, is the lack of a flexible, scalable approach for data collection and analysis. PURPOSE OR GOAL In this study, we report on our development of a survey-based cultural characterization tool that leverages both lightweight data collection from stakeholders in the organization and public information about that organization. We also integrate perspectives from prior literature about faculty, students, and staff in academic departments. Taken together, the resulting survey covers key elements of culture and allows for scalable data collection across settings via customizations and embedded logic in the survey itself. The outcome of this work is a design process for a new and promising tool for scalable cultural characterization, and we have deployed this tool across two institutions. APPROACH OR METHODOLOGY/METHODS We leverage prior research, our own preliminary data collection, and our experience with this approach in a different setting to develop a cultural characterization survey suitable for delivery to multiple engineering department stakeholders (faculty, staff, and students). We start with a modest number of interviews, stratified by these three groups and achieving saturation of responses, to understand their views on their organization, its strengths and weaknesses, and their perceptions of how it ‘works’. We merge this information with public data (for instance, departmental vision or mission statements, which convey a sense of priorities or values) as well as prior literature about higher education culture. We also draw upon our experience in another setting as well as pilot testing data, and the result is a carefully-constructed set of dichotomous items that are offered to department stakeholders in survey form using an electronic survey platform. We also collect background and demographic information in the survey. The resulting data are analyzed using Cultural Consensus Theory (CCT) to extract meaningful information about the departmental culture from the perspectives of the stakeholder groups. ACTUAL OR ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES The resulting survey consists of two parts, each with sub-components. The two top level survey parts contain: (i) items common to all respondents in all settings (i.e. all institutions in this study), and (ii) a set of institution-specific items. Within those sections, the framing of the items is calibrated for the stakeholder groups so that items make sense to them within the context of their experience. The survey has been administered, and the data are being analyzed and interpreted presently. We expect the results to capture the specific elements of local culture within these institutions, as well as differences in perspectives and experience among the three primary stakeholder groups. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS/SUMMARY This study demonstrates a scalable approach to survey development for the purposes of cultural characterization, and its use across settings and with multiple stakeholder groups. This work enables a very nuanced view of culture within a department, and these results can be used within academic departments to enable discussion about change, priorities, performance, and the work environment. 

   more » « less
3. How Engineering Faculty, Staff and Administrators Enact and Experience Diversity Programs

   Blosser, Emily ; Pennathur, Arunkumar ; Pennathur, Priyadarshini ; Bowman, Nicholas ( June 2023 , ASEE 2023 Annual Conference and Exposition)

   Engineering faculty, staff and administrators routinely implement diversity initiatives, yet we know little about their challenges. To address this gap, we consider the perspectives of administrators (deans and department chairs), faculty and staff in one college of engineering at a predominantly White institution (PWI). We ask the following questions: How do engineering education employees tasked with doing diversity work understand their roles? What structural barriers do they encounter in this work? We draw on interviews to better understand their views and experiences as they relate to this institution’s efforts to recruit, retain and graduate undergraduate underrepresented minority students. In our view, for diversity and equity outcomes to be successful, we must extend our focus beyond students to understand how engineering educators do diversity work within their institutions. 

   more » « less
4. Work in Progress: Building a Safe Queer Community in STEM—It Takes a Village to Support a Village

   https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--35616  

   Cross, Kelly ; Farrell, Stephanie ; Chavela Guerra, Rocio ( June 2020 , 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference)

   null (Ed.)

   Recognizing the need to attract and retain the most talented individuals to STEM professions, the National Academies advocate that diversity in STEM must be a national priority. To build a diverse workforce, educators within engineering must continue working to create an inclusive environment to prevent historically underrepresented students from leaving the field. Additionally, previous research provides compelling evidence that diversity among students and faculty is crucially important to the intellectual and social development of all students, and failure to create an inclusive environment for minority students negatively affects both minority and majority students. The dearth of research on the experiences of LGBTQ individuals in engineering is a direct barrier to improving the climate for LGBTQ in our classrooms, departments and profession. Recent studies show that engineering can be a “chilly climate” for LGBTQ individuals where “passing and covering” demands are imposed by a hetero/cis-normative culture within the profession. The unwelcoming climate for LGBTQ individuals in engineering may be a key reason that they are more likely than non-LGBTQ peers to leave engineering. This project builds on the success of a previous exploratory project entitled Promoting LGBTQ Equality in Engineering through Virtual Communities of Practice (VCP), hosted by ASEE (EEC 1539140). This project will support engineering departments’ efforts to create LGBTQ-inclusive environments using knowledge generated from the original grant. Our research focuses on understanding how Community of Practice (COP) characteristics develop among STEM faculty who work to increase LGBTQ inclusion; how STEM faculty as part of the VCP develop a change agent identity, and what strategies are effective in reshaping norms and creating LGBTQ-inclusive STEM departments. Therefore, our guiding research question is: How does a Virtual Community of Practice of STEM faculty develop from a group committed to improving the culture for the LGBTQ community? To answer our research question, we designed a qualitative Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) study based on in-depth individual interviews. Our study participants are STEM faculty across all ranks and departments. Our sample includes 16 STEM faculty participants. After consulting with IPA experts to establish face validation, we piloted the interview protocol with three experienced qualitative researchers. The focus of this paper presents the results of the pilot study and preliminary themes from a sample of the 16 individual interviews. Most participants discussed the supportive and affirming nature of the community. Interestingly, the supportive culture of the virtual community led to members to translate support to LGBTQ students or colleagues at their home institution. Additionally, the participants spoke in detail about how the group supported their identity development as an educator and as a professional (e.g. engineering identity) in addition to seeking opportunities to combine their advocacy work with their research. Therefore, the supportive culture and safe space to negotiate identity development allows the current VCP to develop. Future work of the group will translate the research findings into practice through the iterative refinement of the community’s advocacy and education efforts including the Safe Zone workshops. 

   more » « less
5. Quantitative and Qualitative Assessment of Large-Scale Interventions in a First-Year Experience Program

   Menezes, Gustavo B. ; Allen, Emily L. ; Ragusa, Giselle ; Schiorring, Eva ; Nerenberg, Paul ( June 2019 , ASEE Annual Conference proceedings)

   In this Work-in-Progress paper, we report on the challenges and successes of a large-scale First- Year Engineering and Computer Science Program at an urban comprehensive university, using quantitative and qualitative assessment results. Large-scale intervention programs are especially relevant to comprehensive minority serving institutions (MSIs) that serve a high percentage of first-generation college students who often face academic and socioeconomic barriers. Our program was piloted in 2015 with 30 engineering students, currently enrolls 60 engineering and computer science students, and is expected to grow to over 200 students by Fall 2020. The firstyear program interventions include: (i) block schedules for each cohort in the first year; (ii) redesigned project-based introduction to engineering and introduction to computer science courses; (iii) an introduction to mechanics course, which provides students with the foundation needed to succeed in the traditional physics sequence; and (iv) peer-led supplemental instruction (SI) workshops for Calculus, Physics and Chemistry. A faculty mentorship program was implemented to provide additional support to students, but was phased out after the first year. Challenges encountered in the process of expanding the program include administrative, such as scheduling and training faculty and SI leaders; barriers to improvement of math and science instruction; and more holistic concerns such as creating a sense of community and identity for the program. Quantitative data on academic performance includes metrics such as STEM GPA and persistence, along with the Force Concept Inventory (FCI) for physics. Qualitative assessments of the program have used student and instructor surveys, focus groups, and individual interviews to measure relationships among factors associated with college student support and to extract student perspectives on what works best for them. Four years of data tell a mixed story, in which the qualitative effect of the interventions on student confidence and identity is strong, while academic performance is not yet significantly different than that of comparison groups. One of the most significant results of the program is the development of a FYrE Professional Learning Community which includes faculty (both tenure-track and adjunct), department chairs, staff, and administrators from across the campus. 

   more » « less