Postdoctoral Fellowship: STEMEdIPRF: Expanding the Inquiry into Undergraduate Engineering Admissions to Broaden Engineering Participation

Cornell University, Ithaca NY

Investigators

Abstract

Engineering educational pathways have been thoroughly studied prior to college in elementary and secondary school years (K-12), as well as during undergraduate engineering college programs. However, research on the admission processes for undergraduate engineering programs is considerably scarcer. Studies have discovered relationships between high school grades or standardized testing and success in college engineering programs but have not typically addressed other student experiences represented in the college applications of prospective engineers. This gap is troubling given the known inequities of access to experiences that are valued in college admissions and known biases in current admissions processes. This research will advance the understudied area of engineering undergraduate admissions to discover strategies that can reduce admissions practices that limit the acceptance of a diverse population of engineering students. New university admissions practices that recognize diverse engineering potential will be of significance to and impact tens of thousands of students and broaden the number of students enrolling in undergraduate engineering degree programs, with critical downstream impacts on the size and composition of the engineering workforce that is critical to solving contemporary technological challenges. This research on engineering undergraduate admissions is organized in two phases: 1) a classification of engineering admissions practices and 2) a mixed methods approach to probing student-crafted components of undergraduate engineering applications. The first part describes the ecosystem of admissions protocols in undergraduate engineering programs nationally. University admissions processes vary across institutions, but the engineering education research community lacks a coherent framing of admissions practices. Using taxonomy development and subsequent exploratory data analysis, this research will classify what data is required in the applications of prospective engineers to ABET-accredited institutions, how requirements and admission protocols vary by institution type, and the prevalence of such requirements and protocols across the United States. The second part investigates student-written components of undergraduate engineering applications to determine which experiences and characteristics are valued as important for acceptance by engineering applicants and admissions reviewers. Using a mixed methods design, this research will analyze diverse data sources spanning applications from prospective engineers, documentation from admissions reviewers, and interviews to understand the way students attempt to represent themselves as capable, prospective engineering, how admissions reviewers interpret the same set of student information, and where bias arises in the construction and interpretation of applications that limits participation in engineering. The collective two-phase project will provide a systematic classification of engineering admissions to support future research into engineering admissions, expand the evaluation of engineering admissions protocols by the research community, and underpin evidence-based strategies to eliminate bias in the admission of undergraduate engineers. The goal of improving engineering education research and admissions practices inspired by this guidance have the potential to expand participation in engineering higher education by reducing barriers at the point of entry. This project is funded by the STEM Education Postdoctoral Research Fellowship (STEM Ed PRF) program that aims to enhance the research knowledge, skills, and practices of recent doctorates in STEM, STEM education, education, and related disciplines to advance their preparation to engage in fundamental and applied research that advances knowledge within the field. 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.