The Influence of Climate, Social Networks, and Cultural Models on the Retention of Women and Racially/Ethnically Marginalized Engineers in Graduate School and the Workforce

该项目跟随工程研究生，教授和工业界人士，了解他们在工程领域面临的气候以及与他们的持久性相关的因素时的经验。特别是，这项研究涉及多个解释角度来理解持久性，包括工程师所拥有的知识和信念，他们去寻求建议和资源的人，以及他们在工程中经历的气候。这推进了关于多种交叉现象的科学知识，这些交叉现象在工程劳动力（工业和学术界）如何不代表更广泛的美国人口时塑造了社会趋势。这些知识可以帮助创造更具包容性的工程环境，并扩大对该领域的参与。更具代表性的工程师队伍可以通过多种方式改善社会，例如通过支持工程实践和教育的进步，从而使学院内外的人们生活得更好。这项研究建立在现有数据集的基础上，遵循以前的队列。该项目重新访问了来自11所大学的约2，100名参与者，他们在2014年参加了工程学位课程的第一年。上一个项目通过年度调查和两轮访谈对55名妇女和代表性不足的学生进行了为期五年的跟踪调查。在新的项目中，我们再次使用两个调查来跟踪大队列，并且这次还进行了120名受访者的采访。总而言之，新项目将数据集扩展为一个为期12年的纵向项目，该项目从学生反思他们高中的最后一年开始，然后跟随他们进入研究生院或工程职业的前几年。新项目还为第一项研究中的许多受访者提供了结果信息，这些受访者在第五年仍在参加工程项目。此外，新项目引入了身份测量的额外维度（超越二元性别和性），以进一步捕捉多样性如何可能随后与气候和持久性联系在一起。使用自我网络分析，逻辑回归和反思性主题分析，这项工作的结果可以显示如何制度气候与文化模式和社交网络交叉影响持久性的方式，可能会有所不同的工程师与一系列的身份，包括那些种族/民族，二元性别，性别多样性，和sexuality.This项目是由NSF的EDU核心研究（ECR）程序的支持。ECR计划强调基础STEM教育研究，产生该领域的基础知识。该奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力价值和更广泛的影响力审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

This project follows engineering graduate students, professors, and those in industry to learn about their experiences when it comes to the climate they face in engineering and the factors that relate to their persistence. Specially, this research involves multiple explanatory angles to understand persistence, including the knowledge and beliefs engineers have, the people whom they go to for advice and resources, and the climate they experience in engineering. This advances scientific knowledge about the multiple intersecting phenomena that shape social trends when it comes to how the engineering workforce (industry and academia) does not represent the broader U.S. population demographically. This knowledge can help craft more inclusive engineering environments and broaden participation in the field. A more representative engineering workforce can improve society in multiple ways, such as by supporting advancements in engineering practice and education made possible by diverse perspectives therefore making peoples’ lives better both inside and outside of the academy.This study builds upon an existing dataset, following a previous cohort. The project revisits approximately 2,100 participants from 11 universities who were enrolled in their first year in an engineering degree program in 2014. The previous project followed them for five years through annual surveys and two rounds of interviews with a subsample of 55 women and underrepresented students. In the new project, we follow the large cohort again using two more surveys, and also conduct interviews this time expanded to a total of 120 interviewees. Altogether, the new project expands the dataset into what will become a 12-year longitudinal project that began with students reflecting on their last year of high school to then following them into their first few years of graduate school or engineering occupations. The new project additionally provides outcome information for many respondents from the first study who were still enrolled in their engineering program at their fifth year. Further, the new project introduces added dimensions of identity measures (beyond binary gender as well as sexuality) to further capture how diversity is likely subsequently tied to climate and persistence. Using Ego Network Analysis, Logistic Regression, and Reflective Thematic Analysis, findings from this work can show how institutional climate intersects with cultural models and social networks to impact persistence in ways that likely vary for engineers with a range of identities, including those of race/ethnicity, binary gender, gender diverse, and sexuality.This project is supported by NSF's EDU Core Research (ECR) program. The ECR program emphasizes fundamental STEM education research that generates foundational knowledge in the field. Investments are made in critical areas that are essential, broad and enduring: STEM learning and STEM learning environments, broadening participation in STEM, and STEM workforce development.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.