Search for: All records

Abstract BackgroundLatinos/as/xs continue to face many barriers as they pursue engineering degrees, including remedial placement, lack of access to well‐funded schools, and high poverty rates. We use the concept ofarrebatosto describe the internal reckoning that Latino/a/x engineering students experience through their journeys, particularly focusing on the impact of socioeconomic inequalities. PurposeTo bring counternarratives in engineering education research focusing on the experiences and lived realities of low‐income Latino/a/x engineering students. These counternarratives are an important step in interrogating systemic biases and exclusionary cultures, practices, and policies at HSIs and emerging HSIs and within engineering programs. MethodsPláticaswere conducted with 22 Latino/a/x engineering undergraduates from four different universities in the US Southwest. Thesepláticaswere coded and analyzed drawing from Anzaldúa's theoretical concept ofel arrebato. Special attention was given to participants'arrebatostriggered by their college experiences as low‐income individuals. ResultsAnalysis indicates that Latino/a/x engineering students' arrebatosarise from events that shake up the foundation of their own identity, including an institutional lack of sociopolitical consciousness. This lack of consciousness becomes evident not only in individuals' attitudes toward these students but also in institutional policies that put them at a further disadvantage. ConclusionsFindings have implications for engineering programs, particularly at HSIs and emerging HSIs regarding the creation of policies and practices that aim to secure the retention of low‐income Latino/a/x engineering students and alleviate the systemic barrier they face by affirming the practice of servingness. 

Abstract BackgroundThis systematic review of the literature on Latiné/x/a/o students in engineering was motivated by the recent increase in interest and thus scholarship about this population and the need for a nuanced understanding of the population's diversity. PurposeThis article's purpose is to provide a basis for critically exploring how heterogeneity within the Latiné/x/a/o engineering student population—and across the spectrum of pre‐college to graduate school—is used in engineering educational scholarship. The following research question is addressed: “How is the diversity within Latiné engineering students exemplified in the engineering education literature?” Scope/MethodThis work was guided by a liberative approach as the driving framework to review and synthesize literature published in peer‐reviewed journal articles from 2005 to 2018 that met the following inclusion criteria: (i) population of interest included Latinés; (ii) focused on engineering or included engineering within the larger STEM; and (iii) studied K–20 education. ResultsSixty‐nine studies were reviewed and synthesized. Key findings include an insufficient focus on Latiné students, an increased use of purposeful and critical theoretical frameworks, and a lack of demographics used to present a nuanced understanding of Latiné students in engineering. ConclusionsWe conclude that contextualized demographics should be included which enable analysis that provides nuanced understandings of Latiné students in engineering. While there is increased interest within engineering education to work with Latiné students, our findings point to the need of ensuring that research is conducted with cultural sensitivity, accuracy, and a nuanced understanding of the lived experiences of Latiné individuals. 

In this guest editorial, we problematize the terms Latiné, Latinx, Latina, Latino, and Hispanic used to describe people with Latin American ancestry in the United States to better inform engineering education scholarship and practice. As members of communities that have been classified as Latiné/x/a/o or Hispanic, we are always challenged with the questions: What term should be used in our research, and why? As scholars who are also members of these communities, we bridge the contradictions emerging from our lived experiences and imposed realities while seeking to engage in a critical conversation emerging from our “theory in the flesh” (Moraga & Anzaldua, 1981). While we situate the terms historically in this guest editorial, as an act of resistance, our title places the most recent term (Latiné) first to continue to challenge historical terminologies that demoralize and oppress our communities (Revelo et al., 2022). At the same time, we recognize that for some cultures, choosing to identify by one term over another has real-life implications and consequences, such as being the targets of discrimination and oppression and being seen as transgressors (Mejiaet al., 2022), or being perceived as insiders or outsiders.