2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

There is a pressing need to identify where student success disparities are occurring in engineering, investigate why the differences are present, and propose institutional and pedagogical changes to address them. This work sought to understand how the gap in student success amongst students in engineering is correlated to student identity and academic level. Built upon an anti-deficit framework, this study worked to reframe the narrative around the achievement gap acknowledging the impact that climate and support have on students of color and women in engineering.

The authors hypothesized that there would be a difference in academic performance by a student’s gender and race and that this gap was not reliant upon academic preparedness. The work investigated 10 years of academic records for engineering students at a midwestern, predominantly white, Jesuit institution. The data showed that white women outperformed every other group of students. On the contrary, men of color, including Black, Latinx, and Asian students, earned grades below the population mean. To investigate how the curriculum structure affected student success, an analysis of performance by course level (1000, 2000, etc.) was conducted. This analysis found that course level was a significant factor in student success and the gap amongst demographic groups. At the 1000 level in engineering courses, white men, Asian women, and Black men performed at the population mean; white women performed above the mean; and Latinx men and women performed below the mean. However, at the 2000 level in engineering courses, all men of color earned grades below the population mean, with Black men dropping to 0.5 GPA points below the population mean on a 4.0 scale. Additionally, Asian, Black, and Latinx men showed a decrease in earned grades between 1000 and 2000 level courses whereas all women demonstrated an increase in earned grades over that same period. This first- to second-year disparity was further exasperated when introductory math and science courses were included in the analysis.

The authors hypothesized that the anecdotal arguments, often proposed in faculty discussions, that academic preparedness is the root cause for the gap in performance were misleading due to the comparable performance of these groups at the 1000 level. The authors hypothesized that the sophomore slump was disproportionately impacting men of color due to an institutional failure of climate and support. An analysis of recent university climate data was presented which showed a perceived lack of support by faculty and a chilly classroom climate for students of color. Additional analysis of students’ academic preparedness, including high school GPA and ACT scores, was conducted to identify the correlation of prior metrics on the gap in performance. Future work is focused on understanding what factors are influencing these disparities and how classroom and institutional design can mitigate the effects.