Search for: All records

There have been many initiatives to improve the experiences of marginalized engineering students in order to increase their desire to pursue the field of engineering. However, despite these efforts, workforce numbers indicate lingering disparities. Representation in the science and engineering workforce is low with women comprising only 16% of those in science and engineering occupations in 2019, and underrepresented minorities (e.g., Black, Hispanic, and American Indian/Alaskan Native) collectively representing only approximately 20% (National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics [NCSES], 2022). Additionally, engineering has historically held cultural values that can exclude marginalized populations. Cech (2013) argues that engineering has supported a meritocratic ideology in which intelligence is something that you are born with rather than something you can gain. Engineering, she argues, is riddled with meritocratic regimens that include such common practices as grading on a curve and “weeding” out students in courses.Farrell et al. (2021) discuss how engineering culture is characterized by elitism through practices of epistemological dominance (devaluing other ways of knowing), majorism (placing higher value on STEM over the liberal arts), and technical social dualism (the belief that issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion should not be part of engineering). These ideologies can substantially affect the persistence of both women and people of color–populations historically excluded in engineering, because their concerns and/or cultural backgrounds are not validated by instructors or other peers which reproduces inequality. Improving student-faculty interactions through engineering professional development is one way to counteract these harmful cultural ideologies to positively impact and increase the participation of marginalized engineering students. STEM reform initiatives focused on faculty professional development, such as the NSF INCLUDES Aspire Alliance (Aspire), seek to prepare and educate faculty to integrate inclusive practices across their various campus roles and responsibilities as they relate to teaching, advising, research mentoring, collegiality, and leadership. The Aspire Summer Institute (ASI) has been one of Aspire’s most successful programs. The ASI is an intensive, week-long professional development event focused on educating institutional teams on the Inclusive Professional Framework (IPF) and how to integrate its components, individually and as teams, to improve STEM faculty inclusive behaviors. The IPF includes the domains of identity, intercultural awareness, and relational skill-building (Gillian-Daniel et al., 2021). Identity involves understanding not only your personal cultural identity but that of students and the impact of identity in learning spaces. Intercultural awareness involves instructors being able to navigate cultural interactions in a positive way as they consider the diverse backgrounds of students, while recognizing their own privileges and biases. Relational involves creating trusting relationships and a positive communication flow between instructors and students. The ASI and IPF can be used to advance a more inclusive environment for marginalized students in engineering. In this paper, we discuss the success of the ASI and how the institute and the IPF could be adapted specifically to support engineering faculty in their teaching, mentoring, and advising. 

The Informatics Skunkworks program provides a new framework for engaging undergraduates in research experiences, with a focus on the interface of data science and materials science. The program seeks to provide authentic research, engaged personal learning, and professional development while also being efficient, accessible, and scalable. Initially developed at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, participation continues to grow, with over 90 students engaged in research or training activities during the Fall 2021 semester from 4 institutions. The Skunkworks focuses on reducing barriers to engagement for mentors and students in undergraduate research by replacing bespoke and ad-hoc approaches with efforts and infrastructure that are reusable and scalable, including simplified standardized recruiting methods, online modular training resources, flexible undergraduate accessible software tools, long-term research projects with many similar but distinct components to engage large teams, and support from a learning community. For example, new students have the option to participate in a modular, self-paced, online onboarding curriculum that teaches students the basic skills needed for most data science projects, thereby dramatically reducing the mentor time needed to engage students with limited background in machine learning research. Projects are authentic research challenges that strive to allow for large flexible teams, thereby scaling up their impact from the typical engagement of just one or two students and allowing for extensive peer teaching. Throughout the program, professional development activities are efficiently delivered through standardized materials to teach critical research skills like record keeping, establishing group expectations and dynamics, and networking. These skills are also reinforced at workshop events hosted during the semester, which are effectively delivered online and yield growing impact for modest effort as the community grows. The program has been successfully implemented as evidenced by the last two semesters' evaluation findings through interviews, focus groups, and pre-post surveys. The students reported a positive attitude towards the program. Students' perception about machine learning knowledge and skills and their self-confidence improved after they got involved in the program. The instructors and mentors indicated positive teaching and mentoring experiences, and shared ideas on the further improvement of the program. Building on its early successes the team is continuing to implement evaluation data-driven improvements to the program with the goal of continuing to grow through new collaborations. 

Historic science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) disciplinary cultures were founded in a system that was predominately male, white, heterosexual, and able-bodied (i.e., “majority”). Some societal norms have changed, and so has demand for inclusive STEM engagement. However, legacy mental models, or deeply held beliefs and assumptions, linger and are embedded in the STEM system and disciplinary cultures. STEM reform is needed to maximize talent and create inclusive professions, but cannot be achieved without recognizing and addressing norms and practices that disproportionately serve majority vs. minoritized groups. As leading voices in disciplinary work and application, disciplinary and professional societies (Societies) are instrumental in shaping and sustaining STEM norms. We, leaders of the Amplifying the Alliance to Catalyze Change for Equity in STEM Success (ACCESS+) project, recognize the need to provide Society diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) change leaders with tools necessary to foster systemic change. In this Perspectives article, we present the Equity Environmental Scanning Tool (EEST) as an aid to help Society DEI change leaders elucidate legacy mental models, discern areas of strength, identify foci for advancement, and benchmark organizational change efforts. We share our rationale and work done to identify, and, ultimately, adapt a Society DEI self-assessment tool from the United Kingdom. We share background information on the UK tool, content and structural changes made to create the EEST, and an overview of the resulting EEST. Ultimately, we seek to increase awareness of a Society-specific DEI self-assessment tool designed to help Society DEI change leaders advance inclusive reform. 

Utilizing the foundational principals of improvisation, we developed a practicum that gives early career researchers an opportunity to practice the skills necessary to successfully communicate their work orally to both public and professional audiences. Course evaluation data indicate that students find the practicum to be an effective route to increase both confidence and self-efficacy in their communication skills. Due to the instructor’s emphasis on creating a supportive learning community, the practicum can only accommodate a small number of students each semester. To address this challenge, we developed a training institute for instructors to learn how to teach the practicum or incorporate a subset of the content into their existing courses and workshops. Similar to the practicum, we found a 2.5-day Training Institute to be an effective way to train faculty developers how to innovate and incorporate improv-based principles into their local programming.