By finding that young women deny these violences, we move toward better understandings of the extent to which women's mistreatment becomes normalized in our society.

Historical discussions of social justice in education and its impact on society tend to focus on Brown v. TheBoard of Education (1954), as an antidote to Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), which enshrined the infamous"separate but equal" dictum for racially segregated schools. One person rarely considered in the discussion,yet critical because of her enormous public influence in her day, is Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Most knowCady Stanton as a founder of the Women's Movement in America , and as an advocate for women.However, Cady Stanton also provided a well-documented, systematically developed theory on social justicein education. This surprised us, since her work received enormous scrutiny when feminists of the 1960s and1970s worked to unearth forgotten women. Believing that advancing women's place in educational thoughtrequires understanding the contributions of women to educational thought, we set out to understand CadyStanton's philosophy of social justice in education.

Calling someone an engineer signals both their having an engineer identity and their practicing engineering, but such statements say little about the process of becoming an engineer, and less about the part engineering education might play in such processes. In the 1990s (in the US), engineering education had for almost a decade added a new learning setting to an already complicated curriculum of scientific, mathematical, and engineering-science offerings.

Engineering for a Changing World: A Roadmap to the Future of Engineering Practice, Research, and Education: By James J. DuderstadtOn the Outskirts of Engineering: Learning Identity, Gender, and Power via Engineering Practice: By Karen L. Tonso

Tonso’s commentary on Sinnes and Løken’s paper links what they found to empirical research done in science and engineering career settings. Sinnes and Løken’s findings are a welcome addition to a literature dedicated to pointing out, yet again, some of the reasons we have made so little progress reversing gender inequities in the last 35 years. Their critique of Project Lily adds to what we know about initiatives that fail to grasp the futility of depending on either changing women so they become a better fit in STEM fields (few women exist of this sort) or highlighting those aspects of STEM fields perceived as attractive to underrepresented communities (the masculinized downside will still exist). Sinnes and Løken thus join a growing literature calling for cultural change in STEM disciplines and careers and providing a model feminist critique that other scholars can use to challenge similar initiatives.

Writing effective evaluation and dissemination/diffusion plans This paper will summarize the output from an NSF‐sponsored workshop on writing evaluation and dissemination plans for research on innovations in engineering education. The overarching goal of the workshop was to create a document that would assist engineering educators in writing effective plans for their proposals to NSF. Recent program solicitations from the NSF Division of Undergraduate Education, “Transforming Undergraduate Education in the Sciences, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (TUES)”, explicitly ask that the leaders of TUES projects move beyond disseminating results to engage other educators in adopting the innovations that are developed. Thus, there is a need to design more than dissemination plans. Processes by which innovations are adopted (or adapted) by others studied within a field referred to as ‘diffusion of innovations’. We will adopt this terminology and use the term dissemination/diffusion plan to make clear that more than dissemination is now expected for projects funded by TUES. The workshop was organized by an interdisciplinary team from the learning sciences and engineering education. The workshop participants were similarly interdisciplinary. During the workshop four interdisciplinary teams worked through the process of creating evaluation and disseminations plans for different types of innovations in engineering education. They were asked to summarize the process for creating the plans. After the workshop, the organizing team synthesized the workshop output into a set of guiding questions and major findings. The sets of questions are intended to guide engineering educators through a systematic process of as they begin to construct evaluation and dissemination/diffusion plans. This paper will describe the workshop and present the major findings and the sets of guiding questions that resulted from the synthesis of the output from the workshop. Feedback from workshop participants will also be presented. An appendix to the paper will contain the full workshop report.

Research of any kind requires a great deal of preparation. As you begin your investigation, you need to ready yourself for a pursuit that will take months or, in some cases, years to complete. Gateway inquiry is no different from other methods in this regard, for good research requires planning, contemplation, and building a capacity to achieve the research purpose.KeywordsInterview GuideResearch ProposalAdvance PlacementCritical Race TheoryVietnam VeteranThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This paper examines the learning in a summer robotics workshop for teachers and stu- dents. Participants came from African American communities, some from economically difficult circumstances. Clear examples of scientific literacy abound, with students able to use on-line re- sources both to help them understand how their robot functioned, as well as how to debug the function of their robot. The workshop used an approach grounded in practice theory, and took se- riously calls for inquiry-based learning settings that allow students to control their learning and follow their own interests. Most participants successfully completed an exit exam typical of engi- neering coursework. Keywords: Urban education, identity development, pre-college engineering

This chapter considers the common elements of in-depth interviewing for a research purpose. These general traits, which are characteristic of most interview investigations, are a starting point for interviewing for gateway research into the many layers of significance and meaning that arise in response to an event or experience.KeywordsOral HistoryInterview ResearchEthical PurposeNarrator InteractionOral SourceThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

In-depth interviews are conversations with a purpose, namely, to sit with another and learn what that particular individual can share about a topic, to discover and record what that person has experienced and what he or she thinks and feels about it. Interviewing for a gateway study involves a series of three, modified oral history interviews. Multiple interviews allow you to maximize the opportunity to build rapport and learn from the reflections of the informed individuals who agree to participate in your study.KeywordsDown SyndromeFoster CareOral HistoryLiteracy ProgramOriginal QuestionThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Attacks at Montréal École Polytechnique and Columbine High frame a decade of school shootings and may offer insights into some other rampages. Though times, rationales, and sites of peer-group production differed at these two sites, “school shooter” encoded ways to react in situations where some young men felt unfairly subordinated in society; shooters used deadly violence to assert and reclaim the “rightful” places they felt denied. “School shooter” seemed to borrow from violent masculinities, common socioculturally produced images, or tropes, for acting, implicating not only shooters (who take up extreme versions of these tropes), but also simultaneously everyday sociocultural contexts where violent masculinities are produced, reinforced, and valorized. This article suggests the importance of context to the production of shooters and as such competes with attempts to develop remedies to school shootings grounded in de-contextualized, individualistic approaches that focus only on shooters.

Tunja Stone writes a monthly account of her quest to gain Early Years Professional Status, sharing both the successes and the challenges she faces along the way.

Attacks at Montreal Ecole Polytechnique and Columbine High frame a decade of school shootings and may offer insights into some other rampages. Though times, rationales, and sites of peer-group production differed at these two sites, "school shooter" encoded ways to react in situations where some young men felt unfairly subordinated in society; shooters used deadly violence to assert and reclaim the "rightful" places they felt denied. "School shooter" seemed to borrow from violent masculinities, common socioculturally produced images, or tropes, for acting, implicating not only shooters (who take up extreme versions of these tropes), but also simultaneously everyday sociocultural contexts where violent masculinities are produced, reinforced, and valorized. This article suggests the importance of context to the production of shooters and as such competes with attempts to develop remedies to school shootings grounded in de-contextualized, individualistic approaches that focus only on shooters.