Calling for a Paradigm Shift in the Study of Gender in Engineering Education

Abstract

Background: Dominant discourse regarding gender in engineering and engineering education relies on simplistic notions of gender as a rigid binary, which obscures the existence of transgender and gender nonconforming (TGNC) people and the gender dynamics they experience. Purpose: This paper seeks to address the limits of the dominant gender discourse and research paradigm and propose new paths forward. This article calls researchers to intentionally transform their approach and framing of gender to create gender equity for all. Scope: An examination of existing literature in engineering education is put against prevailing theories of gender and human difference from across academia. The overwhelming majority of literature in the field exists within a reductive gender binary. TGNC students and professionals are largely invisible in engineering education research and theory and this exclusion causes harm to individuals as well as our community as a whole. Such exclusion is not limited to engineering contexts but is found to be a central component of systemic TGNC marginalization in higher education and in the United States. Discussion: We call for a substantive disciplinary shift towards studying the deep complexity of gender informed by, and accountable to, literature on gender theory, queer studies, and feminist research methodology. We propose interventions for engineering education researchers categorized into three levels: 1) Microto recognize gender diversity in engineering education; 2) Meso-to describe and analyze the experiences of TGNC students in research; and 3) Macro-to transform our discipline's conceptualization and theoretical framing of gender.

Revealing the queer-spectrum in STEM through robust demographic data collection in undergraduate engineering and computer science courses at four institutions

“…At all institutions all survey types administered received a few answers that were sarcastic and/or aggressive, such as “Apache Attack Helicopter , ” “Popeye’s spicy chicken , ” and mild vulgarities, but these were <1% for all survey types. Like Haverkamp [ 67 ] we believe it is important to report malicious responses because they reflect the lived experience of those with queer-spectrum identities. Haverkamp [ 67 ] specifically argues that these responses reflect the social and education contexts in which our students are embedded.…”

“…Like Haverkamp [ 67 ] we believe it is important to report malicious responses because they reflect the lived experience of those with queer-spectrum identities. Haverkamp [ 67 ] specifically argues that these responses reflect the social and education contexts in which our students are embedded.…”

Learning in Public and a Path Towards Methodological Activism: A Conversation on Equity Research

“…We imagine an entire community of researchers engaged in methodological activism (Ong, 2005;Zuberi and Bonilla-Silva, 2008) where research methods are purposefully used to empower marginalized populations and enact social change. Doing this will require a reframing of research ethics (Sochacka et al, 2018), including developing new, relational approaches that authentically engage participants (Patrick et al, 2022, in press;Haverkamp et al, 2021;Martin and Garza, 2020;Secules et al, 2018;Smith and Lucena, 2016), as well as finding unconventional ways to present findings that are appropriate to honor participants' lived experiences (Morton and Parsons, 2018).…”

“…We were excited to bring inquiry into severely understudied areas, but we also felt increasingly uncomfortable with how agencies, deeply politicized due to congressional oversight, constrain investigations. Our responsibility now is to join fellow scholars who have sought to problematize the boundaries among social identities (say, those on which "diversity" initiatives may readily be predicated) and mechanisms of marginalization (Haverkamp et al, 2021;Kliewer et al, 2015;Ladson-Billings, 1998). Thus, our reporting necessarily must expand beyond the organizing precepts of the NSF-funded event.…”

Inclusion unlocks the creative potential of gender diversity in teams

“…Gender diversity specifically has been shown to boost collective intelligence (Woolley et al 2010;Xie et al 2020), and the low proportion of non-dominant genders dampens innovative potential in teams (Beede et al 2011;Hofstra et al 2020). Women, transgender, and gendernonconforming people (TGNC) are under-represented in STEM fields -especially in computer science and software careers (Cheryan et al 2017;Haverkamp et al 2021) -, and even if they embark on a career in technology, they are less appreciated and successful, and are more likely to leave at various key stages compared to men (Clark Blickenstaff 2005;Vedres and Vasarhelyi 2019). It is important to analyze gender diversity in STEM teams to understand how diversity contributes to innovation when females are in minority, and often face discrimination (Brooke 2019).…”