Search

Students with disabilities continue to be underrepresented in the STEM workforce. While it is estimated that 26 percent of US adults identify as having one or more disabilities, only 10 percent of employed scientists and engineers identify as belonging to this group. This lack of representation points to larger sociocultural and systemic barriers that limit the participation of people with disabilities in science, engineering, and related fields. In K-12 education, students with disabilities are more likely to leave high school with lower career aspirations, are less likely to have access to college preparatory programs, and are often discouraged from enrolling in engineering and science courses. Those students who matriculate into college often experience a variety of barriers such as lack of support for requesting and obtaining accommodations and inaccessible campus infrastructure. While collaborations between special educators and vocational rehabilitation counselors have proven effective for supporting transition planning and preparation, they are still fairly ill-structured and are rarely expanded to include disciplines specific to the career interests of youth and students with disabilities. Efforts for increasing STEM careers tend to be siloed, and as a result, their impacts are limited. Promoting the participation of youth and students with disabilities in STEM necessitates interdisciplinary collaborative approaches. This manuscript presents the Transition Engineered Collaborative (TEC), an interdisciplinary ecosystem that leverages the Collaborate for Change (C2) framework to bring together the efforts of special education, vocational rehabilitation counseling, and STEM education to collaboratively create inclusive and equitable pathways for students and youth with disabilities wishing to pursue STEM careers. Keywords: students with disabilities, postsecondary employment, inclusion and equity in science, technology, engineering, and math, People with disabilities have been referred to as 'the original lifehackers' due to the innovative ways they alter everyday products, systems, and spaces to access a world not build for [...]

Background: Engineers' identification with their profession is crucial for persistence among engineering students and career professionals. Significant research has been conducted on various dimensions of identity in the engineering field. However, little is known about the ways students negotiate these dimensions as they construct professional identities within a single engineering discipline such as civil engineering. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study is twofold in that we not only seek to enhance our understanding of professional identity formation but also to develop a theory that will allow future research to examine professional formation negotiations and processes through a single, interconnected lens. Design/Method: In this grounded theory study, semistructured interviews with 31 undergraduate students were conducted and analyzed using constant comparative techniques. Frameworks situated within identity theory served as sensitizing concepts and undergraduate civil engineering education served as context to initiate theory development. Results: The result of this study is the Negotiating Equilibrium: Advancing from Outsider to Insider model (the AOI model). This grounded theory model captures the dynamic process through which individuals iteratively integrate definitions of self and profession to develop professional identities during their undergraduate careers. Conclusions: This grounded theory model provides a new framework to capture the complex negotiation process of professional identity formation in undergraduate engineering students. Overall, this work contributes to ongoing conversations that promote the diversity of experiences and backgrounds of students to paint a more holistic and diverse picture of engineering students and of the engineering field.

Background: Many engineering education researchers acknowledge that their positionality impacts their research. Practices for reporting positionality vary widely and rarely incorporate a nuanced discussion of the impact of demographic identities on research. Researchers holding marginalized or relatively hidden identities must navigate additional layers regarding transparency of their positionality. Purpose: We identify ways in which positionality impacts research, with a particular emphasis on demographic identity dimensions. We note that whether identities are relatively marginalized, privileged, hidden, or apparent in a research context creates complexities for conceptualizing, practicing, and disclosing one's positionality. Method: In a collaborative inquiry informed by autoethnography, we assemble positionality reflections of current engineering education researchers to demonstrate the primary ways in which positionality impacts research. Results: We find that positionality impacts six fundamental aspects of research: research topic, epistemology, ontology, methodology, relation to participants, and communication. These aspects of research delve deeper than conceptions of positionality as a methodological limitation, a measure to prevent bias, or a requirement for research quality. Conclusion: The impact of positionality on research is complex, particularly when researchers occupy minoritized identities and for research topics that interrogate power relations between identity groups. By demonstrating the practices of interrogating and representing positionality, we hope to encourage more researchers to represent positionality transparently, thus making researchers' transparency safer for all. We argue that positionality is an important tool for reflecting on and dislocating privilege, particularly when working on equity research.

The national society of professional engineers has said, "engineering has a direct and vital impact on the quality of life for all people." The demand for career-ready engineering professionals has been a consistent, high priority area for the U.S. workforce for the last several decades. Specifically, this call expresses a desire for engineers that are deeply prepared in their technical areas, but also broadly capable as participatory leaders and team members. Thus, leadership-coupled professional competencies that enhance teamwork and problem solving are in high demand from the engineering industry. However, contemporary research suggests that postsecondary engineering programs do not adequately prepare graduates in these areas. This Delphi study identified the consensus perspective of an industry panel regarding the most valuable competencies within the organizational culture of engineering firms. After three iterative rounds, 14 leadership-coupled competencies were identified.

Background: The history of engineering education perpetuates a cultural inertia favoring dominant groups. Engineering education research on broadening participation implies a change towards a desired outcome: increased diversity, equity, and inclusion in the engineering profession. However, many research designs focus on knowledge generation without centering a process of change within research activities or collaborations. Purpose: In this theoretical article, we critically examine the current norms of qualitative research on broadening participation to center research designs that push towards change. Scope: First, we present a simple change model as a way of discussing prototypical qualitative research designs in terms of their component parts. We find that these research designs are limiting in terms of enacting significant change. Next, we point to a variety of institutional norms and values that inherently limit research innovation and impact in these contexts, including the traditional policies, practices, and values that shape our work. Lastly, we draw from experiences in our own work to introduce alternative approaches that center change for equity and inclusion within broadening participation research designs and frame this discussion using the same change model concept to highlight those features. Conclusion: In conclusion, we call for more innovation in qualitative research design and suggest some strategies for innovation that push beyond traditional approaches to instill change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The national society of professional engineers has said, "engineering has a direct and vital impact on the quality of life for all people." The demand for career-ready engineering professionals has been a consistent, high priority area for the U.S. workforce for the last several decades. Specifically, this call expresses a desire for engineers that are deeply prepared in their technical areas, but also broadly capable as participatory leaders and team members. Thus, leadership-coupled professional competencies that enhance teamwork and problem solving are in high demand from the engineering industry. However, contemporary research suggests that postsecondary engineering programs do not adequately prepare graduates in these areas. This Delphi study identified the consensus perspective of an industry panel regarding the most valuable competencies within the organizational culture of engineering firms. After three iterative rounds, 14 leadership-coupled competencies were identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the mid-2000s, the U.S. maker movement has heralded the 'democratization' of tools and skills needed for innovation (Autodesk 2012; Cavalcanti 2013; Deloitte 2015; Dubrow 2015b; Kalil, Patel, and Miller 2014; SBS Viceland 2017; Obama White House 2014, 2016). Considering its involvement of old and new technologies (e.g., blacksmithing, 3D printing), various settings (e.g., urban, rural, educational, community), and identity groups (e.g., class, race), the maker movement is well poised to engage historically and systematically minoritized groups in engineering. However, maker communities perpetuate exclusionary practices, replicating power dynamics often seen in engineering and catering more to white, male, cisgender, heterosexual, middle-class, abled hobbyists (Chachra 2015; Foster 2017; Masters 2018; Vossoughi, Hooper, and Escudé 2016). Still, some makerspaces engage individuals who are homeless (Make: 2015), low-income (CSW 2014; Station North Tool Library n.d.), LGBTQ+ (DeCusatis, Horacek, and Harihareswara n.d.; Liberating Ourselves Locally 2012), people of color (Craddock 2015; Open Works n.d.), from rural communities (CSW 2014; Floyd CFA n.d.), and disabled (Dubrow 2015a; McGinnis 2014). This project considers how diverse makerspaces are conceived, constructed, and operated to actively involve groups traditionally minoritized in STEM. Using participatory action research (PAR), we seek to identify practices to inform the design and implementation of makerspaces yet to achieve diversity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]