Search for: All records

Within engineering, there is a need for more diverse faculty representation to support and serve as role models for underrepresented students. To attract, support, and retain diverse candidates, the pipeline and preparation of faculty must be better addressed. To investigate effective supports, the University of Massachusetts Lowell S-STEM program recruits and supports low-income, high-achieving students who wish to pursue a career in higher education. The UML S-STEM program supports scholars for four years, from their third year in undergraduate studies through the completion of either a master's degree or a qualifying exam within a Ph.D. program. To prepare the students in the program for future faculty positions, they are grouped in cohorts and meet monthly. In this report, we present our programming activities to develop self-awareness and social awareness. The activities of the monthly meetings center around building social consciousness through first developing students’ self-awareness in the context of their engineering journeys, and then through a more general investigation of their understanding of the importance and impact of cultural orientations within and beyond engineering. The aim of the programming was to inspire awareness of the different experiences and needs of students in engineering education. Participants were given brief surveys at the end of each activity, and they participated in end-of-year focus groups. The results indicated the approach taken helped students reflect on their own cultural orientation to teaching and learning, as well as that of their peers. 

Effective mentorship has been linked to improving research skills and productivity, reducing the risk of anxiety and depression, and maintaining students' academic persistence in STEM fields. Recognizing the enormous effect of mentoring on students’ academic careers and confidence, many universities and research institutions provide training programs to faculty to enhance their mentoring skills and knowledge and strengthen mentoring relationships. Many existing mentor programs for faculty adopt the evidence-based Entering Mentoring training curriculum, originally developed by a team of researchers and practitioners at the University of Wisconsin Madison for research faculty in STEM disciplines [1]. From the program evaluation perspective, measuring a training program's results and determining whether intended outcomes are achieved (i.e., the outcome evaluation) can tell whether a program achieves its goals. The results of the evaluation further inform program organizers of needed improvements. Therefore, having good knowledge of these assessment tools and their appropriate usage is essential to planning and evaluating mentoring programs. After the Entering Mentoring training curriculum was launched, various assessment tools and approaches have been utilized by different training program evaluations. This study systematically and thoroughly reviews the extant empirical studies in STEM fields (including intervention and program evaluation studies) that used the Entering Mentoring training curriculum since it was first introduced (2005 to 2023). The goal is to examine: (1) what outcome variables have been assessed to indicate the effectiveness of the Entering Mentoring training curriculum, and (2) what measurement instruments have been used to quantify the outcome variables? Finally, a further discussion is provided, particularly on selecting the appropriate tool based on research goals and resources. The findings of this study not only offer timely insight into research trends on the evaluation of the Entering Mentoring training curriculum in STEM fields but also guide professionals of mentoring training evaluation in identifying important outcome variables and selecting appropriate instrument tools. 

In higher education, faculty diversity is critical for a variety of important outcomes, including supporting students in pursuing and persisting in STEM fields by providing in-group role models. However, current engineering faculty do not equitably represent the general population. In order to address this lack of representation in higher education engineering programs, the University of Lowell S-STEM program has the goal to recruit three cohorts of low-income, high-achieving students who wish to pursue a career in higher education. The UML S-STEM program supports engineering scholars for four years, their last two years of undergraduate school and their first two years of graduate school. The goal of the program is to attract and retain diverse engineering S-STEM scholars and prepare them to enter the competitive pool of future faculty candidates. We present our successes and challenges in recruiting the first two cohorts of low-income, high-achieving students. In the first year, we focused on email blasts, a social media campaign, partnering with student groups, and general outreach via career panels. 55 eligible students were identified by the financial aid office, 12 applications received, and 4 students fit the timeline and eligibility requirements (all were accepted). Three of the four are first generation students, and three of the four identify as students from underrepresented minority backgrounds in engineering. Recruitment lessons learned were that because the scholarship opportunity is so unique, emails alone from a faculty member the students are not familiar with do not work well. Additionally, sophomores are often not proactively seeking more information and scholarship opportunities for graduate school. As a result of these findings, we increased our outreach opportunities to allow students to discuss and explore the benefits of graduate school to build the interest and self-efficacy of our target population. Further, we asked faculty members that work with the students to reach out to students individually and encourage them to apply. Using this approach, after identifying 79 eligible students, 38 applications were received, 84% from our list of eligible students, and 63% from populations underrepresented in engineering. 

This research paper measures college students' sense of belonging. Students' sense of belonging (SB) has been identified as a critical contributor to engineering students’ persistence, academic success, and professional identity in engineering. Therefore, how to accurately measure SB has become an emerging topic but is still challenging. Although engineering education researchers are interested in measuring students’ SB, they have presented concerns over selecting an appropriate instrument that results in trustworthy measurement outcomes. One of the reasons that cause challenges is that SB is a complicated construct that has various conceptual definitions. For example, Goodenow (1993) defined SB as “being accepted, valued, included, and encouraged by others...feeling oneself to be an important part of the life and activity of the class” (p. 25), which can be measured as a general SB. On the other hand, Freeman et al. (2007) viewed SB as a multi-dimensional construct that includes class belonging, university belonging, professors’ pedagogical caring, and social acceptance. Thus far, several instruments have been developed to measure SB from a single-dimensional perspective (e.g., Goodenow’s Psychological Sense of School Membership) and a multi-dimensional perspective (e.g., Slaten et al.’s the University Belonging Questionnaire). To our best knowledge, little research effort has been made to synthesize the information of instruments developed for measuring college students’ SB. This paper attempts to close the gap in the literature by conducting a systematic review following PRISMA (the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to summarize the information and characteristics of existing SB instruments, including the theoretical framework underlying the instrument, psychometric properties in previous studies, and validation works that have been carried out. Specifically, this paper focuses on the following aims: (a) to summarize how SB has been constructed and defined by different theories in higher education, (b) to report existing measurement instruments of SB used in higher education and their psychometric properties (reliability and validity), and (c) to compare various analytical plans for establishing the construct validity (including multicultural validity) in prior instrument development studies. The emergent findings provide insights into how to effectively measure SB and would facilitate school leaders' and educators’ work in promoting engineering students’ success and broadening participation in engineering. Keywords: Sense of belonging, engineering education, instrument, systematic review