Suchergebnisse

Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) educators have a unique opportunity to prepare voters who are knowledgeable about science-related policy issues that inevitably become election issues (Rudolph & Horibe, 2016). A substantial body of higher education literature indicates that college students learn civic values and commit to civic engagement through their curricular and co-curricular experiences (Bowman, 2011; Hurtado et al., 2012). Within STEM education, in particular, we study whether, and to what extent, students' curricular, co-curricular, and classroom experiences—as well as background characteristics—relate to political engagement. We analyze data from the 2017 Student Experience in the Research University survey, using self-reported measures of voting in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and self-assessed political efficacy for 5,838 STEM students at six research universities. We use regression analyses to examine relationships among curricular, co-curricular, and classroom experiences with STEM undergraduates' political engagement. Instead of simply examining whether STEM majors are less politically engaged than their non-STEM peers, our analyses and results provide insights about how STEM academic departments and faculty members can support students' political engagement. We offer implications for education policy and practice for supporting STEM students' political engagement through undergraduate experiences. ; Los profesores de ciencia, tecnología, ingeniería y matemáticas (STEM, por sus siglas en inglés) tienen la oportunidad singular de preparar a votantes potenciales en temas relacionados a políticas de la ciencia, que inevitablemente se convierten en temas a considerar para las elecciones (Rudolph & Horibe, 2016). Una cantidad considerable de literatura de educación superior indica que los universitarios aprenden valores cívicos y se comprometen a la participación cívica a través de sus experiencias curriculares y cocurrriculares (Bowman, 2011; Hurtado et al., ...

AbstractWithin the growing literature about allyship in the workplace, few studies have specifically addressed faculty allyship for faculty colleagues. Previous studies on faculty allyship for inclusive academic environments address only men's contributions as allies. Using an expansive definition of faculty allyship and including any faculty members with membership in at least one dominant social group, we sought to better understand how faculty members perceive allyship, their concerns about allyship, and how those perceptions vary by gender, race, and rank. We examined the responses of faculty who participated in an allyship training program that was offered at a university in Ohio, USA as part of a National Science Foundation ADVANCE grant intended to reduce gender inequity among science, technology, engineering, and mathematics faculty. We framed this study by employing Hardiman et al.'s (2007) three‐dimensional matrix of oppression and used a mixed‐method research design. Participants' primary concerns about engaging in allyship related to their academic rank. We offer several implications for policies, practices, and future research on faculty allyship for faculty colleagues by considering positional power and rank as well as race and gender.