An official website of the United States government
Too few two-year technical and community colleges pursue funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF). Instead, they tend to rely on the U.S. Department of Education or the U.S. Department of Labor for federal grants. From the way grant funding opportunities are announced, to the processes used in reviewing proposals and making funding decisions, to the policies and procedures that govern submission of proposals and implementation of grants, NSF operates differently from other federal funding agencies that make grant awards. The Advanced Technological Education (ATE) Program is unique within NSF because of its focus on two-year colleges and workforce development, specifically for those who complete for-credit programs of study and earn credentials that enable program completers to enter the skilled technical workforce. NSF expects faculty to be involved in developing proposals and implementing projects funded by the agency. Meeting this expectation requires a paradigm shift for many community and technical colleges where the primary emphasis is on teaching and where there is seldom any expectation that faculty will contribute to college efforts to secure external funding from federal sources. In addition, in 2021, the overall NSF funding rate was 26% which presents daunting odds for success. However, 10 years of research demonstrate the effectiveness of an intervention that dramatically increases the funding rate for two-year colleges seeking funding from the NSF ATE Program. Since 2012, the Mentor-Connect initiative has been funded by the NSF ATE Program to help two-year college technician educators and related STEM faculty develop the grant-writing skills needed to meet NSF expectations and benefit from ATE funding. Over the past decade, 80% of Mentor-Connect participants have successfully submitted proposals. To date, the average funding rate for these proposals is 71%. This paper describes how the Mentor-Connect intervention works and for whom, what outcomes have resulted for participants who become grantees, and how two-year colleges and technician educators can benefit.
more »
« less
WIP: NSF-funded Activity in Support of the LGBTQ+ Community: Award Search Strategy and Selection Criteria
In this Work in Progress (WIP) paper, we detail the initial steps taken to study NSF grants that seek to benefit the LGBTQ+ community through understanding their experiences or by working toward their full participation in society. To this end, we have identified active and expired NSF grants that either advance knowledge of LGBTQ+ experiences or offer some benefit to the community (e.g., tailored professional development, addressing and changing the marginalizing culture of STEM, etc.). We then developed a coding scheme to categorize these grants with respect to the level of positive impact they have on the LGBTQ+ community using modified Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts criteria that parallels the NSF’s own criteria for evaluating proposals. The work established in this paper to identify and code LGBTQ-focused NSF grants will next allow us to extract trends in these grants over a period of over 4 decades.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1748499
- PAR ID:
- 10480093
- Publisher / Repository:
- ASEE
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- LGBTQ+ Federal Funding
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Other: pdf
- Location:
- https://peer.asee.org/44136.
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
This theoretical paper proposes a framework to understand LGBTQ participation in STEM that reveals how heterosexism and cissexism operate in engineering. We propose a framework that connects the low representation of LGBTQ students in engineering to experiences of inauthenticity that threatens their participation in engineering and motivation to persist in their studies. LGBTQ students’ social networks in engineering are composed predominantly of people of different sexual and gender identities than them, whereas cisgender, heterosexual students have access to networks composed of peers who nearly entirely share these identities with them. A concept from social network theory, homophily describes how much one's social network is composed of people who are like oneself. Homophilous networks validate personal experiences and identities in ways that we anticipate foster a greater sense of authenticity within those environments. Schmader and Sedikides posit within their State Authenticity as Fit to Environment model that authenticity is an essential human need induced in environments that are congruent with one’s sense of identity. Experiencing state authenticity increases motivation and engagement within that environment; experiencing inauthenticity does the opposite. Heterosexual, cisgender students experience authenticity within engineering with little question, whereas LGBTQ students are more likely to experience inauthenticity which interferes with their participation in engineering fields. Attention to state in/authenticity as a critical aspect of engineering learning environments may help shift these demotivating and disengaging environments for minoritized students like LGBTQ students who wish to pursue these fields of study. To better understand LGBTQ participation in engineering social network analysis could help unpack the relationship between the composition of engineering students’ social networks, their experiences of in/authenticity, and different educational and vocational outcomes in engineering. This may also offer insight into how students organize their networks into environments where they are more likely to experience state authenticity. Implications for practice include helping LGBTQ students find community in engineering and other STEM fields through organizations like Out to Innovate and oSTEM.more » « less
-
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
-
This work-in-progress paper examines four free online courses addressing LGBTQ+ topics and issues and provides recommendations for creating new content and resources for allies in higher education. This exploratory work is guided by the following questions: What free LGBTQ+ courses are available for learners and educators? What content do these courses cover? What are the overlaps among these courses and what new strategies could be adopted when developing new LGBTQ+ resources for people in academia? The scope of this paper explores the content and instructional strategies of courses offered on Coursera, a massive open online course (MOOC) platform. Our preliminary findings indicate that the courses offer many insights and strategies for becoming an ally, fostering inclusive environments, and showing up for LGBTQ+ students; however, they put a smaller emphasis on LGBTQ+ academics and their experiences. Based on these findings, recommendations for educators and course developers are suggested.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)"Abstract—The need for increasing diversity in engineering has paved the road for a rich wealth of literature exploring the experiences of marginalized students in these spaces. Much of this literature utilizes qualitative methodology to understand the experiences of these students, as told through their own words. However, work of this nature can often be influenced by the implicit biases that the researcher carries, as well as the inherent misalignment of power present between researcher and participant. These misalignments may be exacerbated when the researcher is interviewing a marginalized participant, while not identifying as part of a marginalized identity themselves. Students within the LGBTQ+ community may reside at multiple marginalized identities, and as such, the issues surrounding interviewing marginalized identities can be compounded further. Even the most well-intentioned and experienced researcher may find themselves in an interview with a marginalized individual in which implicit biases and unspoken power structures alter the trajectory of the interview. This paper seeks to provide an auto- ethnographic reflection by the first author on the interview of a transgender research participant, while simultaneously providing an opportunity to identify ways in which her interview could have been methodologically improved. This will be accomplished by the first author’s analysis of the interview and meta-data. This analysis is valuable, as the first author identifies as a member of the LGBTQ+ engineering community herself."more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Proceeding:
- The DOI is not currently available.
