skip to main content


Title: What Research Can DO: Rethinking Qualitative Research Designs to Promote Change Towards Equity and Inclusion
Background: The history of engineering education perpetuates a cultural inertia favoring dominant groups. Engineering education research on broadening participation implies a change towards a desired outcome: increased diversity, equity, and inclusion in the engineering profession. However, many research designs focus on knowledge generation without centering a process of change within research activities or collaborations. Purpose: In this theoretical article, we critically examine the current norms of qualitative research on broadening participation to center research designs that push towards change. Scope: First, we present a simple change model as a way of discussing prototypical qualitative research designs in terms of their component parts. We find that these research designs are limiting in terms of enacting significant change. Next, we point to a variety of institutional norms and values that inherently limit research innovation and impact in these contexts, including the traditional policies, practices, and values that shape our work. Lastly, we draw from experiences in our own work to introduce alternative approaches that center change for equity and inclusion within broadening participation research designs and frame this discussion using the same change model concept to highlight those features. Conclusion: In conclusion, we call for more innovation in qualitative research design and suggest some strategies for innovation that push beyond traditional approaches to instill change.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2114242
NSF-PAR ID:
10434990
Author(s) / Creator(s):
;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Studies in engineering education
Volume:
4
Issue:
1
ISSN:
2690-5450
Page Range / eLocation ID:
26-45
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Paretti, M ; Brown, S. (Ed.)
    Abstract Background: The history of engineering education perpetuates a cultural inertia favoring dominant groups. Engineering education research on broadening participation implies a change towards a desired outcome: increased diversity, equity, and inclusion in the engineering profession. However, many research designs focus on knowledge generation without centering a process of change within research activities or collaborations. Purpose: In this theoretical article, we critically examine the current norms of qualitative research on broadening participation to center research designs that push towards change. Scope: First, we present a simple change model as a way of discussing prototypical qualitative research designs in terms of their component parts. We find that these research designs are limiting in terms of enacting significant change. Next, we point to a variety of institutional norms and values that inherently limit research innovation and impact in these contexts, including the traditional policies, practices, and values that shape our work. Lastly, we draw from experiences in our own work to introduce alternative approaches that center change for equity and inclusion within broadening participation research designs and frame this discussion using the same change model concept to highlight those features. Conclusion: In conclusion, we call for more innovation in qualitative research design and suggest some strategies for innovation that push beyond traditional approaches to instill change. 
    more » « less
  2. null (Ed.)
    In 2016, 10 universities launched a Networked Improvement Community (NIC) aimed at increasing the number of scholars from Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate (AGEP) populations entering science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) faculty careers. NICs bring together stakeholders focused on a common goal to accelerate innovation through structured, ongoing intervention development, implementation, and refinement. We theorized a NIC organizational structure would aid understandings of a complex problem in different contexts and accelerate opportunities to develop and improve interventions to address the problem. A distinctive feature of this NIC is its diverse institutional composition of public and private, predominantly white institutions, a historically Black university, a Hispanic-serving institution, and land grant institutions located across eight states and Washington, DC, United States. NIC members hold different positions within their institutions and have access to varied levers of change. Among the many lessons learned through this community case study, analyzing and addressing failed strategies is as equally important to a healthy NIC as is sharing learning from successful interventions. We initially relied on pre-existing relationships and assumptions about how we would work together, rather than making explicit how the NIC would develop, establish norms, understand common processes, and manage changing relationships. We had varied understandings of the depth of campus differences, sometimes resulting in frustrations about the disparate progress on goals. NIC structures require significant engagement with the group, often more intensive than traditional multi-institution organizational structures. They require time to develop and ongoing maintenance in order to advance the work. We continue to reevaluate our model for leadership, climate, diversity, conflict resolution, engagement, decision-making, roles, and data, leading to increased investment in the success of all NIC institutions. Our NIC has evolved from the traditional NIC model to become the Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching and Learning (CIRTL) AGEP NIC model with five key characteristics: (1) A well-specified aim, (2) An understanding of systems, including a variety of contexts and different organizations, (3) A culture and practice of shared leadership and inclusivity, (4) The use of data reflecting different institutional contexts, and (5) The ability to accelerate infrastructure and interventions. We conclude with recommendations for those considering developing a NIC to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts. 
    more » « less
  3. The transformation of engineering culture towards inclusion is a key objective in the retention and professionalization of a diverse engineering workforce. Faculty are key stakeholders impacting that inclusion because of their prominent role in shaping students’ underrepresented, marginalized, and/or hidden identities and core experiences in engineering classrooms. Yet, many faculty are not provided with practicable resources and training that can enrich their knowledge, empathy, and understanding of students’ diverse and marginalized experiences that differ from their own. This lack of resources has slowed the transformation of engineering culture and provides an opportunity for practical impact by researchers and faculty developers. However, the topic of developing inclusive culture remains understudied and has evaded traditional approaches to education research. Quantitative approaches can broadly identify the presence of marginalization or inclusion, but they lack the nuance to enhance a reader’s inclusive understanding. In contrast, qualitative and narrative-based approaches provide rich accounts of marginalized experiences and perspectives, but do not typically reach a broad audience of technical engineering faculty. Thus, these accounts are often disseminated to faculty and researchers already interested and invested in broadening participation, perpetuating a cycle of “preaching to the choir”. In the Audio for Inclusion project, we answer BPE’s call for innovative methods that increase research impact on broadening participation outcomes by proposing a novel audio narrative dissemination approach to foster inclusive understandings for engineering faculty. Specifically, we ask the following research questions: ● What marginalized student narratives related to identity and agency are present in engineering educational culture? ● How does hearing these narratives impact faculty perspectives of diversity and inclusion in engineering classrooms? This interactive poster presents the student audio narratives developed so far and overviews the entire project. 
    more » « less
  4. Background: While a primary goal of education research is discovering and disseminating scholarly knowledge, traditional dissemination alone is insufficient to foster sustainable educational change. Journals and conferences target a particular audience invested in a specific topic; it is often not practical for stakeholders to engage with research outside of their specific areas of specialization. Thus, the research-to-practice gap continually widens as education research findings fail to influence wider audiences. Purpose: In this paper, we highlight audio as a promising alternative format for dissemination. Audio dissemination has the potential to multiply the impacts of qualitative research by disseminating findings with more immediacy and accessibility than traditional research publications. Approach: We summarize one specific audio narrative dissemination approach conducted as part of the pilot phase of the Audio for Inclusion Project, a recent National Science Foundation-funded project to foster inclusive understandings for engineering faculty. We organize the discussion around orienting goals and challenges encountered, as well as lessons learned and suggestions for future improvements. Findings: Lessons learned for audio narrative dissemination include paying close attention to creating a coherent and cohesive narrative by removing distracting details, and aligning student actors with participants so that the tone, affect, and emphasis remain true to the participant. Implications: This paper presents new possibilities for qualitative researchers on broadening participation, to repurpose their interview content to form practical resources and training that can improve faculty’s knowledge, empathy, and understanding of students’ diverse and marginalized backgrounds. Additionally, these findings will be useful for all researchers seeking new methods of translating research findings into actionable impact. 
    more » « less
  5. National Science Foundation (NSF) funded Engineering Research Centers (ERC) must complement their technical research with various education and outreach opportunities to: 1) improve and promote engineering education, both within the center and to the local community; 2) encourage and include the underrepresented populations to participate in Engineering activities; and 3) advocate communication and collaboration between industry and academia. ERCs ought to perform an adequate evaluation of their educational and outreach programs to ensure that beneficial goals are met. Each ERC has complete autonomy in conducting and reporting such evaluation. Evaluation tools used by individual ERCs are quite similar, but each ERC has designed their evaluation processes in isolation, including evaluation tools such as survey instruments, interview protocols, focus group protocols, and/or observation protocols. These isolated efforts resulted in redundant resources spent and lacking outcome comparability across ERCs. Leaders from three different ERCs led and initiated a collaborative effort to address the above issue by building a suite of common evaluation instruments that all current and future ERCs can use. This leading group consists of education directors and external evaluators from all three partners ERCs and engineering education researchers, who have worked together for two years. The project intends to address the four ERC program clusters: Broadening Participation in Engineering, Centers and Networks, Engineering Education, and Engineering Workforce Development. The instruments developed will pay attention to culture of inclusion, outreach activities, mentoring experience, and sustained interest in engineering. The project will deliver best practices in education program evaluation, which will not only support existing ERCs, but will also serve as immediate tools for brand new ERCs and similar large-scale research centers. Expanding the research beyond TEEC and sharing the developed instruments with NSF as well as other ERCs will also promote and encourage continual cross-ERC collaboration and research. Further, the joint evaluation will increase the evaluation consistency across all ERC education programs. Embedded instrumental feedback loops will lead to continual improvement to ERC education performance and support the growth of an inclusive and innovative engineering workforce. Four major deliveries are planned. First, develop a common quantitative assessment instrument, named Multi-ERC Instrument Inventory (MERCII). Second, develop a set of qualitative instruments to complement MERCII. Third, create a web-based evaluation platform for MERCII. Fourth, update the NSF ERC education program evaluation best practice manual. These deliveries together will become part of and supplemented by an ERC evaluator toolbox. This project strives to significantly impact how ERCs evaluate their educational and outreach programs. Single ERC based studies lack the sample size to truly test the validity of any evaluation instruments or measures. A common suite of instruments across ERCs would provide an opportunity for a large scale assessment study. The online platform will further provide an easy-to-use tool for all ERCs to facilitate evaluation, share data, and reporting impacts. 
    more » « less