2023 Collaborative Network for Computing and Engineering Diversity (CoNECD)

This paper seeks to understand the emotional state of underrepresented first-generation (FG) engineering students when asked about their previous experiences and perceptions with hidden curriculum in engineering. Hidden curriculum (HC) has been viewed as the unwritten, unofficial, and often unintended messages (e.g., assumptions, lessons, values, beliefs, attitudes, and perspectives) that are not openly acknowledged in a given environment. HC often consists of positive (inclusive) or negative (exclusionary) systemic messages that are structurally supported and sustained. The U.S. Department of Education classifies first-generation college students as those who came from families where neither parent obtained a four-year college degree. First-generation students are disproportionally people of color (POC). The literature suggests that FG students lack the important social and institutional capital to navigate their learning and working environments which they may not have obtained at home.
The thread of this paper focused on the intersection of first-generation status, gender, and race or ethnicity (specifically Latiné/a/o/x, Black, and white participants). A mixed-method survey instrument (UPHEME) was disseminated between 2018/19 to explore the perceptions of engineering undergraduate students, graduate students and faculty about HC, how it is defined, received and responded to.
More specifically, the analysis focused on the second factor of the UPHEME instrument, emotions. In general, people cannot process an environment without feeling it first. In this instance, and factoring through the lens of HC, emotions serve to whittle down “infinite range of variables that underpin the choices we make.” We chose to focus on positive and negative emotions to establish what emotions propel us to engage (or not) with whatever HC might be present. These factors could have significant importance for retention purposes of women and POC.
The preliminary results suggest that of those participants answered the short-answer question and through the lens of the intersection of FG and gender, 41% (n = 49) of self-identified undergraduate women and 29% (n=64) of self-identified undergraduate men recalled negative emotions related to HC in engineering. Furthermore, for those FG participants who did not recall any personal experiences connected to HC, 18% (n=21) were self-identified women and 23% (n=50) were self-identified men.
At the intersection of FG and race or ethnicity, 32% (n = 53) of white participants had negative emotions about their experiences with HC compared to 27% (n = 39) of Latinx and 28%(n = 10) of Black participants. Additionally, 24% (n=40) of FG white participants did not identify any experiences compared to 6% of Latino and 25% of Black participants. Finally, at the intersection of FG with gender and race, we found that 42% (n = 22) white women experienced HC with reported negative emotions vs 44% (n = 17) of Latinas and 40% (n = 6) Black women. Of the first gen White men, 27% (n = 31) had negative emotions compared to 37% (n = 22) of Latino and 20% (n = 4) Black men. Overall, the findings suggest that intersectional women and men recall negative HC experiences, which suggests potential detrimental consequences to their mental health and well-being.