Explaining Choice, Persistence, and Attrition of Black Students in Electrical, Computer, and Mechanical Engineering

Clemson University, Clemson SC

Investigators

Abstract

This project aims to identify policies and practices that lead to increased representation, persistence, and graduation as well as attrition for Black students in Electrical Engineering (EE), Computer Engineering (CpE), and Mechanical Engineering (ME) and to make actionable recommendations for policymakers regarding best practices. The project team is investigating why Black students choose and persist in, or leave ME, EE, and CpE; how their academic pathways vary by gender and institution type; and what policies and practices promote greater retention of Black engineering students. The project will ultimately broaden understanding of the factors that have limited the full participation of Black students in EE, CpE and ME, and identify the positive factors that can attract and retain them in these fields. This project's intellectual merit is based on a mixed-methods research design that combines the quantitative power of large sample sizes (currently 300,000 students at 17 institutions) available from the Multiple-Institution Database for Investigating Engineering Longitudinal Development (MIDFIELD), the qualitative richness of in-depth student interviews, department and college administrator interviews, and detailed content analysis of institutional policies and contexts at two Historically Black Colleges and Universities and two Predominantly White Institutions. The researchers integrate three theories that have been used in prior work on under-represented minority students: critical race theory, community cultural wealth theory, and intersectionality. This approach will strengthen institutional and individual explanations of engineering student pathways and outcomes. A comprehensive dissemination plan will ensure that the study results reach a variety of audiences interested in diversifying engineering education. 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.