2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

While gender parity exists at the undergraduate level in biomedical engineering (BME) [1], there is still a significant decline in female representation at the graduate and faculty levels [2,3]. Research shows that women turn away from engineering often because of social expectations/pressure, perceptions that they don’t belong, and a hostile learning environment [4-8]. Additionally, unconscious bias is widespread [9] and a significant barrier for advancement in science and engineering for women [10-13]. We hypothesized that open discussion of gender inequalities and of implicit bias will enhance a sense of belonging for women students within BME and increase the likelihood of their retention in engineering. To test this, we added new lectures, assignments, and active-learning sessions into required seminar courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels. A survey was administered to the students in each class at the beginning and end of the semester to assess the impact of this new educational module. The survey included validated scales of intrinsic engineering interest, identification with engineering, extrinsic engineering utility, engineering self-efficacy, career intentions, perceptions of compatibility between gender and engineering, sense of belonging in the department, and experience of discrimination. Baseline differences in each scale between men and women were assessed for undergraduate and graduate students using Mann-Whitney tests. Additionally, Mann-Whitney tests were used to assess any changes in each scale after the semester. A total of 63/72 (pre/post) undergraduate students (58% women) and 41/55 (pre-post) graduate students (35% women) completed the surveys. We found that the scores for women undergraduate and graduate BME students were the same as men in nearly every category at the beginning of the semester. The only difference was that women perceived their gender as less compatible with engineering. At the undergraduate level, there was no change in any of the scales over time both in the aggregate data and when disaggregating by gender. At the graduate level, there was a significant increase in interest in engineering over time; however, there was also a decrease in perceived compatibility of gender with engineering and an increase in the experience of discrimination over the semester. Disaggregating the data by gender found only that both men and women experienced the same increase in discrimination over time; the change in engineering interest and gender compatibility was not observed within either subpopulation. Together, these data suggest that our educational modules on diversity, equity, and inclusion did not improve women’s sense of belonging or increase their intention to remain in engineering. This lack of effect is likely due to a lifetime of experiences that have primed them for thinking that their gender is not compatible with engineering. A limitation of this study is that there were not parallel control groups that did not receive the educational modules, which makes it difficult to interpret whether the increased experience of discrimination for graduate students was due to the education modules or some other event that occurred during the semester.