By Wendy L. Hill, Ph.D.
Director of the Hanson Center for Inclusive STEM Education and Rappolt Professor Emeritus of Neuroscience, Lafayette College, Easton PA

In an excellent essay titled “Small World: Crafting an Inclusive Classroom (No Matter What You Teach)” my colleague Mary Armstrong writes “It is my contention that every single classroom—from Soil Science to Ethnic Studies, from First Year Writing to Physics—can function as an incubator for inclusivity, as a social experience that fosters a positive climate.” Armstrong asserts that when classrooms are intentionally designed to be inclusive, they become catalysts for social change, creating climates where diverse perspectives thrive and all students, but especially those from historically minoritized groups, feel supported and valued.

Engineering courses are not exempt from Armstrong’s call to action. These courses are also central to creating the building blocks for a culture of inclusion, where each engineering classroom is designed not only to convey subject-specific knowledge but to foster belonging, respect, and equity among all students. By cultivating these positive social experiences in the classroom, we build a foundation for a more equitable and just future in engineering and STEM fields at large.

The kinds of dynamic engagements in engineering classes recommended coincide with a recent pedagogical shift in STEM education, one that focuses on active learning and teamwork, with more emphasis placed on collaborative skills than ever before. This reflects broader changes in both educational and professional settings, recognizing that the ability to work effectively in teams is crucial for success in engineering. Validating this shift, the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) includes the importance of teamwork in its criteria for student outcomes, stating that students should be able to work on teams that “include individuals of diverse backgrounds, skills, or perspectives” and also demonstrate the ability “to function effectively on a team whose members together provide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives. [emphasis added].”

But are engineering faculty truly helping students learn the skills to develop and lead inclusive, diverse teams? When it comes to student team projects, I fear that instead of building “incubators for inclusivity,” we are inadvertently stoking inclusivity’s incinerators.

Unlike the structured environment of a classroom, group projects unfold in a more diffuse, capricious space. As instructors, we lose much of the influence we typically exert over peer-to-peer interactions when students work on team projects. Many team activities and interactions take place outside regular class meetings, often at times and in spaces far removed. The carefully crafted pedagogical techniques we rely on within the four walls of our classrooms, laboratories, and design studios can fade, leaving students to navigate team dynamics on their own. Team experiences have the potential for students to form strong bonds with one another and to grow as learners. Unfortunately, research has indicated that in these peer-group settings students can also experience microaggressions and other biases (Rodriguez-Simmonds, et al., 2024). Student teamwork in engineering projects can passively entrench harmful social habits and behaviors that disproportionately impact historically marginalized groups and undermine efforts to broaden participation in the field (Johnson, 2022; Meadows & Sekaquaptewa, 2013; Rodriguez-Simmonds, et al., 2024; Tonso, 2006). When we fail to intentionally prepare students for teamwork and to help them tap into the positive connections they can form, group projects risk becoming a breeding ground for inequity and missed opportunities, rather than a powerful learning experience that supports community values and elevates inclusion.

 

Too often it seems, faculty neglect to provide students with the essential tools to navigate the inherently challenging process of collaboration, leaving them without guidelines for effective and inclusive group work (Dawson & George, 2024). As James Lang (2022), a prominent national voice on pedagogy, describes, “If you are assigning and grading group projects and not giving your students any explicit guidance or resources for how to work together effectively, and not checking in and intervening when groups show signs of dysfunction, then you are engaging in pedagogical malpractice.”

This “malpractice” is nonetheless standard practice. Beddoes and Panther (2018) found that engineering faculty often have no clear strategy for team formation, no systems to spot or fix team issues, little oversight of team dynamics, and largely ignore the need for inclusive practices—leaving students to fend for themselves in dysfunctional teams. This neglect is particularly detrimental to students from historically marginalized groups, who report feeling less secure in team settings and having lower psychological safety (Wang et al., 2019). Psychological safety refers to the belief that you won’t be rejected or humiliated in a given setting or role, creating a climate where people feel comfortable sharing their thoughts and ideas (Edmondson, 1999). Reduced psychological safety can intensify feelings of exclusion and limit individuals’ ability to fully contribute to the team (Trinkenreich et al., 2024). Hence, psychological safety is crucial not just for improving team performance, but for fostering a genuine sense of belonging and building strong interpersonal peer relationships, which are critical for persistence in STEM (Ohland et al. 2024; Rainey et al. 2018). Therefore, promoting psychological safety and inclusion in teamwork isn’t just a pedagogical best practice; it reflects our core values as a community dedicated to diversity, equity, and inclusion.

If we continue to overlook student teams as an inclusivity issue, we hazard perpetuating a cycle of exclusion and the continuation of inequities. As advised by Monteiro et al. (2020) “Unless we intentionally design teamwork practices within engineering courses, there will be inequity in learning outcomes linked to students’ identity (e.g. specific cultures and gender).” To genuinely support our students, we must go beyond simply sorting them into groups when beginning a team project and letting the assignment just run its course. We must address the “hidden curriculum” of peer collaboration—the unspoken norms and expectations that can either foster or hinder effective teamwork– and which are not equally known among our students (Johnson, 2022). We need to provide guidance on inclusive teaming which is continually assessed and reinforced, ensuring that students not only have positive, inclusive, and equitable collaboration but also develop the essential teamwork skills needed for success (Huerta et al., 2024).

I urge faculty to step up and provide inclusive teamwork guidance—not just as a matter of good teaching, but as a critical step to advance equity and inclusion in support of all of our students’ educational journeys. Faculty must give greater scaffolding and support for students engaged in group projects so that they build meaningful connections through shared problem-solving and develop genuine camaraderie and trust through their joint efforts.

To take this step, instructors can reach out to their institution’s teaching and learning center, which can offer professional development about research-driven pedagogy for advancing inclusion and psychological safety in group projects. They can also connect with colleagues in their departments or across their institution who are experienced in inclusive teamwork practices to learn proven, effective strategies. Additionally, reviewing online guides can provide advice and recommendations about best practices that can help enhance skills.

I also encourage faculty to evaluate how their students experience group work. For example, as part of the mission of the Hanson Center for Inclusive STEM Education, the center I lead, we’ve conducted climate studies for each program in the Engineering Division at Lafayette College. These studies seek to “take the temperature” of students, especially as regards diversity, equity, and inclusion. In partnership with faculty, the Hanson Center administers the surveys, analyzes the data, and provides tailored recommendations. We share the results with the individual program, highlighting successes and identifying areas for growth. Together, we celebrate what’s working and take action where needed. Each program then develops short-, mid-, and long-term action steps, which, along with the main findings, are shared with students in a “town hall” meeting format. By conducting these studies across the different programs, we’ve identified common themes that call for broader, division-wide initiatives. One key finding from our climate studies is the need for more intentional efforts to foster inclusive teamwork. Thanks to a strong and forward-thinking faculty partnership, we’ve developed a range of initiatives to address this:

Student Guidebook on Effective Teaming:

The Hanson Center for Inclusive STEM Education and the Center for the Integration of Teaching, Learning, and Scholarship collaborated on a student guidebook on effective and inclusive teaming, providing students with strategies to navigate group dynamics and foster collaboration. This student-facing resource was developed in collaboration with Student Fellows. The guidebook provides learners with tools to empower students towards successful, inclusive, and meaningful collaboration. All students in the first-year course “Introduction to Engineering Design” now receive the guidebook as part of their entry into the engineering curriculum, a course that introduces them to teamwork and design.

Workshops for Design Teams on Inclusive Teaming:

The Hanson Center provides workshops for senior design teams focused on inclusive teaming and psychological safety, helping students build the skills and confidence to create positive group environments. We have found that although students are aware of the importance of diverse teams to developing innovative solutions, they are not fluent in how psychological safety is needed to harness the benefits that come from diversity (Bresman & Edmondson, 2022). The workshops offer specific guidance on how to navigate challenges while building inclusive teamwork skills (Rodriguez-Simmonds, et al., 2024).

Faculty Development in a Cohort Model:

A team of five faculty members from the Mechanical Engineering Department participated in the Inclusive Instructor’s Academy, an initiative of the Center for the Integration of Teaching, Learning, and Scholarship. As a departmental team, they worked collaboratively and with Student Fellows to advance effective pedagogical strategies (Addy et al., 2023). Their efforts centered on promoting inclusive teamwork and integrating broader inclusive teaching practices into their courses as well as scaffolding this work in the Mechanical Engineering curriculum.

Community Conversations to Enhance Inclusion:

The Hanson Center in partnership with the Engineering Division organizes a peer-mentor program for first-year engineering students, pairing them with junior and senior engineers. As part of the program, thanks to a student-led initiative, we are using frameworks from the student guidebook on effective teamwork to bring mentors and mentees together for conversations grounded in restorative justice circle practices (Boyes-Watson & Pranis, 2015). These discussions seek to create a safe, respectful environment within the circle discussions that will encourage open dialogue, conflict resolution, and stronger community bonds, all skills that will enhance teamwork and foster a culture of inclusivity and collaboration both in and beyond the classroom.

 

Echoing Armstrong’s advice and Block’s (2018) assertion that “the small group is the unit Ma transformation,” instructors can transform student teams from potential sites of harm to powerful incubators for inclusivity, driving cultural change in engineering. Imagine if every design team and group project in engineering courses became a space that actively and intentionally advanced diversity, equity, and inclusion—where students could find joy and fulfillment in collaborating to unlock creative solutions and embrace diverse perspectives. These small groups could become the strong, stable building blocks of an engineering community that fosters a sustainable, inclusive climate where all members thrive. By actively promoting psychological safety and fostering inclusion in student group work, we can cultivate a culture that truly reflects our commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion.

 

 

References

Addy, T. M., Dube, D., Mitchell, K. A., & SoRelle, M. (2023). What Inclusive Instructors Do: Principles and Practices for Excellence in College Teaching. Taylor & Francis.

Armstrong, M.A. (2011). Small world: Crafting an Inclusive Classroom (No Matter What You Teach). Thought & Action, 27, 51-61.

Beddoes, K., & Panther, G. (2018). Gender and Teamwork: An Analysis of Professors’ Perspectives and Practices. European Journal of Engineering Education, 43(3), 330–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2017.1367759

Block P. (2018). Community:The Structure of Belonging. Berrett-Koehler, Oakland CA.

Boyes-Watson, C. & Pranis, K. (2015).  Circle Forward: Building a Restorative School Community. Living Justice Press.

Bresman, H., & Edmondson, A.C. (March 17, 2022). Research: To Excel, Diverse Teams Need Psychological Safety. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2022/03/research-to-excel-diverse- teams-need-psychological-safety

Dawson, A., & George, K. (2024, September 1). New Rules for Teamwork. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2024/09/new-rules-for-teamwork.

Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999

Huerta, M. V., Sajadi, S., Schibelius, L., Ryan, O. J., & Fisher, M. (2024). An Exploration of Psychological Safety and Conflict in First-year Engineering Student Teams. Journal of Engineering Education, 113(3), 635–666. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20608

Johnson, A. M. (2022). Collaborating in Class: Social Class Context and Peer Help-Seeking and Help-Giving in an Elite Engineering School. American Sociological Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/00031224221130506

Lang, J. M. (2022, June 17). Why Students Hate Group Projects (and How to Change That). The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/why-students-hate-group-projects-and-how-to-change-that

Meadows, L. A., & Sekaquaptewa, D. (2013). The Influence of Gender Stereotypes on Role Adoption in Student Teams. In Proceedings of the 120th ASEE Annual Conf. Exposition (pp. 1-16). Washington, DC: American Society for Engineering Education. https://peer.asee.org/22602

Monteiro, A., Monteiro, S., & Jones, K. S. (2020). Inclusive Teamwork Design Within a First Year Engineering Course. Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA). https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi0.14141

Ohland, M. W., Redler, E., Woehr, D. J., & Loughry, M. L. (2024). Norms for Team Process and Outcome Measures by Race/Ethnicity and Gender. In M. E. Auer, U. R. Cukierman, E. Vendrell Vidal, & E. Tovar Caro (Eds.), Towards a Hybrid, Flexible and Socially Engaged Higher Education (pp. 90–101). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51979-6_10

Rainey, K., Dancy, M., Mickelson, R., Stearns, E., & Moller, S. (2018). Race and Gender Differences in How Sense of Belonging Influences Decisions to Major in STEM. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0115-6

Rodriguez-Simmonds, Godwin, A., Langus, T., Pearson, N., & Kirn, A. (2024). Building Inclusion in Engineering Teaming Practices. Studies in Engineering Education. https://seejournal.org/articles/10.21061/see.84

Trinkenreich, B., Gerosa, M. A., & Steinmacher, I. (2024). Unraveling the Drivers of Sense of Belonging in Software Delivery Teams: Insights from a Large-Scale Survey. Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3597503.3639119

Tonso, K. L. (2007). On the Outskirts of Engineering. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Wang, J., Cheng, G. H. L., Chen, T., & Leung, K. (2019). Team Creativity/innovation in Culturally Diverse Teams: A Meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(6), 693–708. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2362

 

About the Author