Faculty Support for Minority Engineering Programs

Faculty Support for Minority Engineering Programs
复制标题

对少数族裔工程项目的教师支持

DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1998
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Gary R. Martin
Gary R. Martin
中科院分区：
--
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. K. Hackett;Gary R. Martin

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

一项调查是制定和邮寄给随机抽样的工程教授在学校在全国各地与ABET认证（工程和技术认证委员会）计划，要求他们评估工程学院正式，结构化，一般少数民族工程计划存在的“价值和适当性”，沿着以下七个MEP特定组件：MEP学生社团、奖学金、学习中心、夏桥项目、特别辅导项目、招聘会和颁奖宴会。在1-10的范围内（1 =非常低，根本不应该存在; 10 =非常高，关键），工程学教授倾向于表达对MEP的普遍认可，认为范围的中间（5.5）代表中立立场，样本平均值为6.51。然而，存在相当大的变异性（SD=3.13）。对财政和学术援助形式的支持最多，对集群类型活动的支持较少。此外，还探讨了机构类型（公立与私立;研究与非研究），规模和学校位置之间的态度差异。公立学校的得分高于私立学校;从地区来看，中西部最高，东部最低;从规模来看，我们发现学校越大，得分越高。最后，开放式的意见进行了分析，作为一个定性的组成部分，阐明了数值结果。
A survey was developed and mailed to a random sample of engineering professors at schools across the country with ABET‐accredited (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology) programs, asking them to assess the “value and appropriateness” of the existence of a formal, structured, general Minority Engineering Program in their School of Engineering, along with the following seven MEP‐specific components: MEP student associations, scholarships, study centers, summer bridge programs, special tutoring programs, career fairs, and awards banquets. On a scale of 1–10 (1 = Very low, should not exist at all; 10 = Very high, critical), the engineering professors tended to express general endorsement of MEP's considering the middle of the scale (5.5) represents a neutral position and the sample average was 6.51. However, there was considerable variability (SD=3.13). Greatest support was found for financial and academic forms of assistance, with less support given to clustering‐types of activities. In addition, attitudinal differences between types of institutions (public vs. private; research vs. non‐research), size, and location of schools were explored. State schools yielded higher scores than private; regionally, the Midwest was the highest and the East was the lowest; and in terms of size, we found that the larger the school, the higher the score. Finally, open‐ended comments were analyzed as a qualitative component to shed light on the numerical results.