More Like this

1. Conducting Sound, Equity-Enabling Computing Education Research

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3623762.3633495  

   McGill, Monica M; Heckman, Sarah; Chytas, Christos; Liut, Michael; Kazakova, Vera; Sanusi, Ismaila Temitayo; Shah, Selina Marianna; Szabo, Claudia (December 2023, ACM)

   Problem. To investigate and identify promising practices in eq- uitable K-12 and tertiary computer science (CS) education, the capacity for education researchers to conduct this research must be rapidly built globally. Simultaneously, concerns have arisen over the last few years about the quality of research that is being con- ducted and the lack of research that supports teaching al students computing. Research Question. Our research question for our study was: In what ways can existing research standards and practices inform methodologically sound, equity-enabling computing education research? Methodology. We conducted a concept analysis using existing re- search and various standards (e.g. European Educational Research Association, Australian Education Research Organisation, Ameri- can Psychological Association). We then synthesised key features ni the context of equity-focused K-12 computing education research. Findings. We present aset of guidelines for general research design that takes into account best practices across the standards that are infused with equity-enabling research practices. Implications. Our guidelines wil directly impact future equitable computing education research by providing guidance on conducting high-quality research such that the findings can be aggregated and impact future policy with evidence-based results. Because we have crafted these guidelines to be broadly applicable across a variety of settings, we believe that they will be useful to researchers operating in a variety of contexts. 

   more » « less
2. Designing Our Way to Equity in Unprecedented Times

   Kezar, A.; Culver, K.C.; Harper, J. (August 2022, Academic leader)

   Campuses are seeking ways to address two major issues: racial equity and ongoing pandemic-related challenges. One approach to addressing these issues that few leaders have considered is liberatory design thinking (LDT). LDT is a well-established process that is uniquely positioned to mitigate these issues. In a recent research study that investigated how campuses designed improved supports for non-tenure-track faculty, we found that design teams used LDT to create innovative solutions to equity-related issues that affect non-tenure-track faculty. The LDT process has also been used in other social settings with similarly favorable results. 

   more » « less
3. Building a vision for more effective equity indices and planning tools

   https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2022.947452  

   Rosan, Christina D.; Heckert, Megan; Zerbo, Russell; Benitez Mercado, Erykah (September 2022, Frontiers in Sustainable Cities)

   Recent years have seen a proliferation of equity indices and environmental justice screening tools to support more just environmental planning processes that attempt to quantify the concept of equity. While the equity index framework has proven important to advance the conversation around environmental equity and connect need to investments, we are concerned that these tools do not adequately address the intersectional nature of environmental justice concerns, effectively incorporate local knowledge on the lived experience of residents, or provide an actionable set of next steps to be taken. We see opportunities to rethink and expand on the equity index model to address issues of climate justice and preparedness through the development of Planning for Resilience and Equity through Accessible Community Technology (PREACT), a multipurpose and multi-scalar climate preparedness and neighborhood planning software application informed by both community need and community assets. This perspective article will discuss the theoretical and practical importance of adding these perspectives into screening tools and will describe our research in Philadelphia, PA aimed at understanding these challenges and developing a more inclusive and community-responsive methodology for effective tool development. 

   more » « less
4. Moving Toward Transdisciplinary Learning Around Topics of Convergence: Is it really Possible in Higher Education Today?

   Strimel, G.; Pruim, D.; Briller, S.; Martinez, R.; Lucas, D.; Kelley, T.; Sohn, J. (June 2023, Review directory American Society for Engineering Education)

   There have been numerous demands for enhancements in the way undergraduate learning occurs today, especially at a time when the value of higher education continues to be called into question (The Boyer 2030 Commission, 2022). One type of demand has been for the increased integration of subjects/disciplines around relevant issues/topics—with a more recent trend of seeking transdisciplinary learning experiences for students (Sheets, 2016; American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2019). Transdisciplinary learning can be viewed as the holistic way of working equally across disciplines to transcend their own disciplinary boundaries to form new conceptual understandings as well as develop new ways in which to address complex topics or challenges (Ertas, Maxwell, Rainey, & Tanik, 2003; Park & Son, 2010). This transdisciplinary approach can be important as humanity’s problems are not typically discipline specific and require the convergence of competencies to lead to innovative thinking across fields of study. However, higher education continues to be siloed which makes the authentic teaching of converging topics, such as innovation, human-technology interactions, climate concerns, or harnessing the data revolution, organizationally difficult (Birx, 2019; Serdyukov, 2017). For example, working across a university’s academic units to collaboratively teach, or co-teach, around topics of convergence are likely to be rejected by the university systems that have been built upon longstanding traditions. While disciplinary expertise is necessary and one of higher education’s strengths, the structures and academic rigidity that come along with the disciplinary silos can prevent modifications/improvements to the roles of academic units/disciplines that could better prepare students for the future of both work and learning. The balancing of disciplinary structure with transdisciplinary approaches to solving problems and learning is a challenge that must be persistently addressed. These institutional challenges will only continue to limit universities seeking toward scaling transdisciplinary programs and experimenting with novel ways to enhance the value of higher education for students and society. This then restricts innovations to teaching and also hinders the sharing of important practices across disciplines. To address these concerns, a National Science Foundation Improving Undergraduate STEM Education project team, which is the topic of this paper, has set the goal of developing/implementing/testing an authentically transdisciplinary, and scalable educational model in an effort to help guide the transformation of traditional undergraduate learning to span academics silos. This educational model, referred to as the Mission, Meaning, Making (M3) program, is specifically focused on teaching the crosscutting practices of innovation by a) implementing co-teaching and co-learning from faculty and students across different academic units/colleges as well as b) offering learning experiences spanning multiple semesters that immerse students in a community that can nourish both their learning and innovative ideas. As a collaborative initiative, the M3 program is designed to synergize key strengths of an institution’s engineering/technology, liberal arts, and business colleges/units to create a transformative undergraduate experience focused on the pursuit of innovation—one that reaches the broader campus community, regardless of students’ backgrounds or majors. Throughout the development of this model, research was conducted to help identify institutional barriers toward creating such a cross-college program at a research-intensive public university along with uncovering ways in which to address these barriers. While data can show how students value and enjoy transdisciplinary experiences, universities are not likely to be structured in a way to support these educational initiatives and they will face challenges throughout their lifespan. These challenges can result from administration turnover whereas mutual agreements across colleges may then vanish, continued disputes over academic territory, and challenges over resource allotments. Essentially, there may be little to no incentives for academic departments to engage in transdisciplinary programming within the existing structures of higher education. However, some insights and practices have emerged from this research project that can be useful in moving toward transdisciplinary learning around topics of convergence. Accordingly, the paper will highlight features of an educational model that spans disciplines along with the workarounds to current institutional barriers. This paper will also provide lessons learned related to 1) the potential pitfalls with educational programming becoming “un-disciplinary” rather than transdisciplinary, 2) ways in which to incentivize departments/faculty to engage in transdisciplinary efforts, and 3) new structures within higher education that can be used to help faculty/students/staff to more easily converge to increase access to learning across academic boundaries. 

   more » « less
5. Defining and Delivering Equity: How one RPP develops a definition and puts it into practice

   https://doi.org/10.1109/RESPECT51740.2021.9620634  

   Hadad, Roxana; Ryoo, Jean; Flapan, Julie; Kong, Steve (May 2021, Defining and Delivering Equity: How one RPP develops a definition and puts it into practice)

   CSforALL and SageFox (Ed.)

   Computer science (CS) has the potential to positively impact the economic well-being of those who pursue it, and the lives of those who benefit from its innovations. Yet, large CS learning opportunity gaps exist for students from systemically excluded populations. Because of these disparities, the Computer Science for All (CS for All) movement has brought nationwide attention to inequity in CS education. Funding agencies and institutions are supporting the development of research-practice partnerships (RPPs) to address these disparities, recognizing that collaboration between researchers and educators yields accurate and relevant research results, while informing teaching practice. However, for initiatives to effectively make computing inclusive, partnership members need to begin with a shared and collaboratively generated definition of equity to which all are accountable. This paper takes a critical look at the development of a shared definition of equity and its application in a CS for All RPP composed of university researchers and administrators from local education agencies across a large west coast state. Details are shared about how the RPP came together across research and practice to define equity, as well as how that definition continued to evolve and inform the larger project’s work with school administrators/educators. Suggestions about how to apply key lessons from this equity exercise are offered to inform similar justice-oriented projects. 

   more » « less