Search for: All records

This work-in-progress research paper describes the development and pilot administration of a survey to assess students’ perceptions about sociotechnical issues in engineering. After refining the survey through iterative rounds of review, we piloted it in an “Introduction to Circuits” course at a large, public university in the Midwestern USA in which we deployed a short module addressing technical and social issues. In this paper we document our instrument development process and present descriptive statistics and results of paired t-tests used to analyze the pilot data. We also describe ways our instrument can be implemented by instructors and researchers in multiple contexts. 

The Multiple Institution Database for Investigating Engineering Longitudinal Development (MIDFIELD) has been developed over many years with substantial investment by the National Science Foundation through Engineering Education and Centers in the Engineering Directorate and the Division of Undergraduate Education in the Education and Human Resources Directorate. This project is focused on transitioning MIDFIELD to the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). The current team of MIDFIELD researchers continues to support this project including helping others learn to use the database. We have developed detailed tutorials in R that introduce MIDFIELD, key metrics, and example scenarios. We have also designed and facilitated workshops. In year 2, we offered the MIDFIELD Institute, an online three-day workshop to help researchers learn about and use MIDFIELD effectively. Attendees included graduate students, early career faculty, senior faculty, and an NSF program officer. Results from the 2023 offering of the MIDFIELD Institute are described in this paper. Dissemination and products are also summarized. 

Previous research in engineering education has identified the characteristics and behaviors associated with being an engineer, including aspects such as dress norms, professionalism, and standards. These studies have also explored the reasons why historically marginalized students may experience a sense of alienation from the engineering field. In the realm of engineering, learning how to become an engineer is shaped through the hidden curriculum, everyday interactions and the cognitive dynamics that are involved in those interactions. These cognitive dynamics are called “scripts” and they involve the schemas and frames of reference that build one’s engineering identity. As individuals engage with the field, they develop scripts by adopting the behaviors and traits that are recognized as traditional characteristics of engineers by their mentors, professors, peers, industry leaders, and others within the engineering community. Young engineers learn to employ the language, phrases, practices, skills, values, and beliefs that signify their acquisition of the social constructs associated with the engineering world while allowing them to acculturate within their respected field . Moreover, engineering scripts often center around whiteness – a socially constructed formation that functions as a system of social control. Some examples of whiteness include the racialization of students of color and their portrayal as incapable of performing in engineering (i.e., deficit ideologies), the idea that engineering knowledge is only constructed in English (i.e., language subtraction), or the perception that people are selected to engineering spaces just based on ability (i.e., meritocracy). In this paper, we analyze current literature in engineering education research to argue that scripts of whiteness in engineering are detrimental for women and people of color because they keep racialization in engineering spaces in perpetual motion. We posit that individuals in engineering spaces are not only conditioned to scripts of whiteness but also become the bearers of racialized hierarchical classifications to maintain power and sustain systemic barriers in engineering education. Guided by the questions: (1) how is whiteness interpreted and manifested in engineering and (2) what common scripts of whiteness are prevalent in engineering spaces, a systemic review of the literature was performed. Given that the research on whiteness in engineering is not very extensive, the literature review was not limited to journals in engineering education research but also those published in journals such as in higher education, science education, and counseling psychology. We argue that the lack of diversity in engineering is a direct outcome of a system that perpetuates white supremacy to actively keep students of color away, and we suggest that engineering education research cannot move forward toward racial equity unless these scripts are identified and challenged rather than being considered part of the “engineering culture.” Future work will explore how these scripts are developed, maintained, and promoted in engineering.