2019 Annual Conference Session Materials
| U492·CDEI Professional Development: Addressing Race and Privilege in the STEM Classroom
Sun. June 16, 2019 1:15 PM to 2:45 PM Room 23, Tampa Convention Center Dr. Kelly J Cross – University of Nevada, Reno Dr. Elizabeth Litzler – University of Washington Dr. Emily Affolter – University of Washington Dr. Christian Matheis – Guilford College |
| M392B·CDEI Professional Development: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) 100
Mon. June 17, 2019 11:30 AM to 1:00 PM Room 25, Tampa Convention Center Dr. Meagan C Pollock – National Alliance for Partnerships in Equity Designed for current and future educators and administrators, this interactive session is for individuals who wish to learn about and begin to apply strategies that improve diversity, equity, and inclusion. The session aims to answer the questions: What is DEI? Why should I care about it? What is an equitable learning environment and in what ways does it benefit my students? What are my first steps toward becoming a more equitable educator? Participants will actively engage in learning activities that provide an introductory overview of DEI. The last portion of the session will provide space for break out groups on practical topics that are application focused. Participants will select a topic that is most important to them. Depending on the number of participants, we may offer break-outs for the following topics: – Identifying implicit bias in the workplace and classroom; – Adding a diversity component to your research; – Writing unbiased letters of recommendation; – Writing a diversity statement; – Assessing curriculum for bias; – Eliminating micro-inequities; – Learning to talk about race; – Serving persons with disabilities with universal design. Participants receive all handouts and resources from break-out sessions. Session Materials: |
| M592·CDEI Conversations: Using Design Thinking to Promote Change Related to Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity
Mon. June 17, 2019 3:15 PM to 4:45 PM Room 24, Tampa Convention Center Dr. Carla B. Zoltowski – Purdue University-Main Campus, West Lafayette Dr. Andrew O. Brightman – Purdue University-Main Campus, West Lafayette Prof. Patrice Marie Buzzanell – Purdue University-Main Campus, West Lafayette Dr. Sean Eddington – Kansas State University Dr. Danielle Corple – Wheaton College Ms. Janet Goings – GM (retired)
Despite change in profiles of some engineering disciplines and curricular reforms for engineering education, there still has not been the deep transformation needed to integrate inclusionary thinking and processes into professional formation. In part, the reason is that diversity and inclusion are still framed as “problems” to be solved. This problem-solving orientation admittedly has produced some success, but this success is tempered by feelings of failure that the problems have not gone away. What is necessary now is cultivating a “wicked problem” sensibility toward the broader issues of formation and diversity and inclusion that necessitates processual, contextual and fully integrative approaches. We have been using Design Thinking as part of a broader NSF study to address issues of diversity and inclusion in two different departments at a large Midwestern university. As part of the study, we have engaged diverse stakeholders in identifying needs and developing and implementing prototypes in response to these needs. In this interactive special session, we will guide participants through several tools that we have used in our project and invite conversations on how Design Thinking can be used to foster change in their local contexts. |
| T192B·CDEI Professional Development: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) 200
Tue. June 18, 2019 8:00 AM to 9:30 AM Room 18, Tampa Convention Center Dr. Meagan C Pollock – National Alliance for Partnerships in Equity
This interactive session is for individuals who wish to take a more active role in advocating DEI within their sphere of influence. The session will be divided into three parts. [Part 1] SELF: To be a DEI advocate, we must first start with ourselves. Exercises will help participants understand and identify ways in which we can expand our personal DEI lens. [Part 2] SYSTEM: To be a DEI advocate, we must be able to identify DEI issues. After an overview of key issues, policies, and practices in educational institutions that either marginalize students based on race, gender, class, ability/disability, and sexuality, or aim to facilitate educational equity, exercises will equip participants with strategies to recognize issues from an institutional and systemic perspective. [Part 3] OTHERS: To be a DEI advocate, we must be able to talk about DEI issues. Exercises will provide space for participants to practice strategies for starting and managing difficult conversations. Participants will receive all handouts and resources from DEI 100, and additional resources and strategies for continuing the conversation with others. Session Materials: PDF – DEI 200 Case Studies; MS Word – DEI 200 Case Studies |
| T492·CDEI Conversations: Using a Multicultural Framework for School Counselors for Career Advocacy in Engineering Fields
Tue. June 18, 2019 1:30 PM to 3:00 PM Room 24, Tampa Convention Center Dr. Cameron Denson – North Carolina State University Dr. Leroy L. Long III – Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ., Daytona Beach Dr. Adria Shipp Dunbar – North Carolina State University Little research and/or resources have been dedicated to the crucial role that career development professionals, specifically school counselors, play in advocating for STEM engagement for all students. There is a need to shift the roles of school counselors from that of a talent identifier for engineering and other STEM-related careers to that of a talent developer (Byars-Winston, 2014). Heretofore, there has been a missed opportunity of intervention through school counselors, who are in many ways “the gateway to the workforce,” as the ones who assist students in early career exploration, middle and high school course placements, and post-secondary career decision-making related to current workforce needs (Falco, 2017). Underlying this point, research posits that few school counselors are aware of engineering-related career development matters, career opportunities and pathways, or strategies for promoting pursuit of STEM careers, especially since most school counselors, themselves, do not have STEM backgrounds (Byars-Winston, 2014). Even more troubling is the paucity of literature available that speaks to issues of diversity and equity awareness for school counselors and how this may impact their STEM advocacy for underrepresented populations in STEM (Byars-Winston, 2014). |
| W192·CDEI Conversations: The Community’s Quest for Impact – a Discussion about the Role of Education Research in Actually Broadening Participation
Panel · ASEE Committee on Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Wed. June 19, 2019 8:00 AM to 9:30 AM Room 24, Tampa Convention Center Dr. Walter C. Lee – Virginia Tech Dr. Jeremi S London – Virginia Tech Teirra K Holloman – Virginia Tech Crystal M Pee – Virginia Tech Dr. Bevlee A. Watford P.E. – Virginia Tech Dr. Chanee Hawkins Ash – Virginia Tech
Every year, the National Science Foundation (NSF) invests considerable resources to fund research projects geared towards advancing our understanding of issues related to broadening participation in engineering (BPE). Despite years of investments in fundamental research, the status quo has not sufficiently changed. While we acknowledge that various factors influence the lack of desired change in this area, we also feel that now is a good time to reflect on what we know about ways to address this multifaceted issue from a research perspective. As part of engaging the broader engineering education community, the purpose of this session is to discuss the role—both current and potential—of education research in broadening participation in engineering and computer science. More specifically, we will explore the desired impact of BPE research. According to London (2018), there are three types of research impact: (1) scientific, (2) contextual, and (3) societal. Though the scientific impact of scholarship focused on BPE is apparent (e.g., publications, conference papers, etc.), the contextual and societal impact of this work is not as evident. Participating in this discussion will help ASEE members situate themselves in the larger context of research and practice as it relates to BPE. It is our hope that following this conversation, participants will have a more nuanced understanding of the relationship between research and practice in this context. This session is geared towards both consumers and producers of BPE knowledge, exploring what types of research is needed as well as what sorts of impact should be expected. No prior knowledge is required, but participants who intend for their work to inform BPE efforts or engage in BPE efforts themselves will benefit most. The insights from the group discussion will be documented, analyzed and summarized after ASEE, disseminated to interested participants, and published as a future conference paper or journal article. London, J. (2018). A Content Analysis of How STEM Education Researchers Discuss the Impact of their Publicly-Supported Research, International Journal of Engineering Education, 34(3), 1120-1137. |
| W492·CDEI Conversations: Supporting Teams, through a DEI Lens
Wed. June 19, 2019 1:30 PM to 3:00 PM Room 24, Tampa Convention Center Dr. Robin Fowler – University of Michigan Dr. Laura K Alford – University of Michigan Molly Maher – University of Michigan Holly Derry – To be added later In this 90-minute CDEI session, we propose to present and get feedback on a tool we are developing to support student teams. “Tandem” is a tool for team instruction, assessment, and formative/summative feedback. Because it is implemented electronically and messages are personalized via a tailoring system, it allows for more individualized instruction at scale. Tandem uses student input, in the form of surveys and reflections on team function and team support needs. The tool includes a set of modules intended to provide tailored feedback on specific team needs, and faculty can set up situations that “trigger” the provision of this tailored content. In the creation of this tool, we are intentionally considering issues of equity and inclusion. We believe that careful support of student groups is critical to improve student experiences on teams, a place where students sometimes report inequitable experiences, microaggressions, and implicit (and sometimes explicit) bias. The faculty sponsors of this tool have particularly considered gendered task allocation and gender dynamics in communication in their own research, but the tool attempts to more broadly consider individual student identity and how each student experiences team projects. Individual students then receive personalized feedback and lessons based on their traits and experience in the course, addressing concepts like motivational theory and identity threat. The lessons and reflective experience aim to leave students with skills and approaches to create positive environments in future group work. Faculty are also given clear visibility into the performance and traits of individual teams, moving beyond numeric peer evaluations. Session Materials: cdei492 team data for activity; cdei492 Tandem handout |
| T581·Brainstorming Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Approaches and Challenges in Industry
Tue. June 18, 2019 3:15 PM to 4:45 PM Room 21, Tampa Convention Center Cynthia Murphy-Ortega – Chevron Corporation Tavia Carson – Siemens Digital Industries Software Tammy Stevens – Northrop Grumman Corporation Rae Stuart – The Boeing Company The Corporate Member Council in collaboration with the Committee on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion is excited to offer an interactive facilitated session where audience members will engage in an industry-sponsored activity that addresses workplace approaches and challenges for enabling a diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplace culture. Chevron, Siemens, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing will kick off the session with a four-member panel addressing the topic, followed by panelists’ Q&A. Next, audience members will participate in a facilitated scenario-based exercise and outbrief. The session will close with sharing of lessons learned, primary take-aways, and closing statements from each of the panelists. Collected notes created throughout will be summarized into a brief session report post-conference and shared with all participants.
Session Materials: |