Engineering climate for marginalized groups: Connections to peer relations and engineering identity

• Published in: Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.) D.C.), 2023-04, Vol.112 (2), p.284-315
• Main Authors: Davis, Susannah C., Nolen, Susan Bobbitt, Cheon, Naeun, Moise, Elba, Hamilton, Eric William
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aggression; Bias; climate; Departments; Disadvantaged; diversity; Educational Environment; Engineering; Engineering Education; Gender; Group theory; Identification (Psychology); identity; inclusivity; Organizational Climate; Peer Relationship; Peer relationships; Perceptions; Power Structure; Qualitative analysis; Race; Safety; Social exclusion; Structural models; Student Attitudes; Students; survey; Teacher Student Relationship; Undergraduate Students; underrepresented students
• ISSN: 1069-4730; 2168-9830
• DOI: 10.1002/jee.20515

Background A better understanding of departmental climate and its relationship to engineering identity is needed to diversify engineering and improve marginalized students' experiences. Purpose/Hypothesis We investigated whether undergraduate engineering students from 16 social identity groups perceived departmental climate differently from one another and examined psychological and behavioral factors contributing to these perceptions and their relationship to engineering identification. Design/Method We surveyed 398 undergraduate engineering students about departmental climate and engineering identity, testing structural models across race and gender. Qualitative analysis of open‐ended items complemented quantitative results. Results Students rated climate for dominant identities (White, male, and/or US‐born) as more welcoming than for 14 nondominant identities, broadening the notion of “nondominant” identities in engineering. In structural models, invariant across race and gender, students' perceptions of bias, safety, and faculty support predicted climate ratings; peer relations and microaggressions predicted engineering identity. There were mean differences in perceptions across intersections of race and gender, but students in all groups perceived a climate gap favoring dominant identities. Open‐ended responses highlighted students' desire for a more diverse, inclusive program and the importance of peer relations. Conclusions Departmental climate can be less welcoming for engineering students with many different nondominant identities. Attending to both students' own social positioning and their perceptions of climate for other students can open opportunities for change in engineering departments. Results suggest that efforts to improve peer relations in group work could be important in promoting disciplinary identification in historically marginalized groups.