Search for: All records

The National Science Board has declared that the long-term vitality of the U.S. workforce relies on the full range of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) career pathways being available to all Americans. This declaration was premised on the increasing diversity in the U.S. population [1] and the need for multiple perspectives on the complex problems faced by society [2]. Thus, the National Science Foundation, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, the American Institutes of Research, and the Council of Graduate Schools have stated that the increased participation of women and members of racially minoritized and marginalized (RMM, including Black, Hispanic/Latinx, and Indigenous) groups in STEM is imperative to maintain the U.S. standing as a global leader in innovation. Because engineering doctoral graduates account for a large share of the innovation workforce [3], the ongoing lack of diversity in the engineering doctoral workforce remains a problem with far-reaching implications for the U.S. economy. The ‘mold’ for an engineering doctoral student was created by graduate education's earliest beneficiaries: young, White, and single men. Students who fall outside this mold, including women, people of color, older people, people with children, and people with disabilities are more likely than their traditional graduate student counterparts to report climate-related issues [4]. While some studies of university or campus-level climate for students have included doctoral students in general, few studies disaggregate findings by discipline or by demographic categories beyond gender identity and race/ethnicity. In engineering, Riley, Slaton, and Pawley’s [5] observed that the engineering education research community tends to take up issues of diversity focused on “women and [racial and ethnic] minorities while queerness, class, nationality, disability, age, and other forms of difference are, for the most part, not seen as requiring address”. This literature review was conducted as a preliminary assessment of the available research literature produced by the engineering education community on organizational climate affecting the retention of engineering doctoral students from diverse backgrounds. We seek to understand this specific student group’s retention as an organizational climate issue and use an intersectional approach to consider the meaning and relevance of students’ belonging, simultaneously to multiple social categories, such as gender identity, sexual orientation, socioeconomic background, race/ethnicity, and disability status within the context of engineering doctoral education as a first step to building a climate survey instrument. Searches on February 2, 2023, for existing scoping reviews and systematic reviews on this topic conducted on JBI Evidence Synthesis, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Campbell Collaboration did not provide results [6]. The objective of this literature review is to explore how the concept of ‘climate’ is being used in the context of doctoral engineering student retention to degree completion and gather a body of evidence of climate factors. To do this, we conducted a targeted literature review and used intersectionality [7] [8] as our approach to interpreting the literature, as we aim to understand how climate affects the retention of engineering doctoral students from diverse backgrounds. In this paper, we first briefly present our understanding of organizational climate and intersectionality, then we explain our methodology, followed by results and finally discuss our analysis of the climate literature in engineering. 

In today’s global market economy, equipping engineering students with a broader set of skills associated with an entrepreneurial mindset will empower them to create value for the companies they join or to launch their own startups. In recent years, institutions across the nation have been investing resources in developing maker spaces plus curricular and extracurricular programs to provide opportunities for students to acquire knowledge and skills, and pursue innovative ideas in a safe environment – while still in college. This study presented assessment data from a NSFI-Corps site program at a Southwestern university to understand the impact of the program on undergraduate and graduate engineering students’ knowledge, perceptions, and practice of entrepreneurship. In the four-cohort assessment data, participants indicated significantly increased confidence in value proposition, self-efficacy in entrepreneurship, and customer discovery, while maintaining high interest in entrepreneurship. Furthermore, the data indicated that participants with a GO decision (to continue pursuing their technology) had significantly higher perception on the current status of technology and business model than did participants with a no-GO/unsure decision. In addition, this study presented a new pilot program to be offered in spring 2020 and aimed to further enhance the I-Corps Site efforts on campus for broader impacts. 

In 2011, the National Science Foundation launched the I-Corps Program and as of today close to one hundred institutions are participating through Nodes or Sites program. While both program focus on providing training and funds to accelerate the implementation of innovative ideas to market, they have different implementation models and thus challenges. For I-Corps Sites, while each institution utilizes similar approaches on the implementation, including an I-Corps team formation, knowledge and skills training, customer discovery and guidance from experienced entrepreneurs, each ecosystem is unique because the program outcomes are closely related to the entrepreneurial culture both on campus and also in the surrounding local community. A major challenge for Sites is recruiting quality teams and having access to qualified mentors to provide guidance to teams. In this paper, we will present the implementation of a Site in a large public institution located away from a large metropolitan area, the challenges we addressed both in recruiting teams and mentors, and how the program has evolved in its current state. In addition, authors will be able to present on data from the program evaluation which will include findings from pre- and post-quizzes on knowledge of entrepreneurship terms and pre- and post-program surveys that captured changes in perceptions of entrepreneurship, such as interest in entrepreneurship, confidence in value position, and self-efficacy in entrepreneurship, marketing/business planning, and customer interview. In this paper, we will present data from five I-Corps Site cohorts representing close to fifty student teams. Since program participants represent a diverse group (33% females and 15% ethnic minorities) and also wide range of educational levels (freshman to graduate students), we are able to evaluate program impact also with respect to gender, race/ethnicity, and classification. This paper will provide valuable information for institutions interested in pursuing an I-Corps grant and to those who are already have a grant but are looking for additional ways to further enhance program impact on their campus.