Engineering leadership is an emerging area in engineering education, and engineering has called for diverse leaders and engineers in the field. The current conceptualization of engineering leadership consists of approaches focusing on skills, behaviors, traits, and leadership programs. However, in addition to these known aspects of engineering leadership, there are "hidden" or "invisible"features of leadership that shape ones' overall leadership experience. While engineering leadership has considered professional identity in its scholarship, the influence ofpersonal and cultural identity remains underexplored. This work explores the stories of early-career Black engineers to address the research question, What conceptualizations of leadership do early-career Black engineers illuminate through their stories as a result of explicitly and intentionally considering racial identity in engineering leadership performance and development? The study leveraged Esteban-Guitart and Moll's [Esteban-Guitart, M., & Moll, L. C. (2014a). Funds of identity: A new concept based on the funds of knowledge approach. Culture & Psychology, 20(1), 31-48; Esteban-Guitart, M., & Moll, L. C. (2014b). Lived experience, funds of identity, and education. Culture & Psychology, 20(1), 70-81] funds of identity framework and thematic analysis to analyze the stories of six early-career Black engineers to illuminate features of engineering leadership from their perspectives. These invisible features of engineering leadership include environmental influences, lived experience, dimensions of identity, and mentorship. For early-career Black engineering leaders to thrive, explicit recognition of their invisible leadership is necessary. Such recognition can come through professional advancement opportunities and mentorship that center early-career Black engineering leaders' contributions to the technical and cultural realms of the engineering ecosystems they navigate.

She is a member of the Coley Shifting Perceptions, Attitudes, and Cultures in Engineering (SPACE) Lab research group

Background: Black students are an integral part of engineering education. However, despite millions of investments in broadening participation in engineering, they remain underrepresented in engineering. Literature shows that Black students face a variety of obstacles, but involvement in identity-based professional organizations (such as the National Society of Black Engineers and Black Greek Lettered Organizations) promotes persistence and academic success in engineering. There is a need to coalesce and synthesize the existing literature on the added value of Black engineering students’ participation in identity-based organizations. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to synthesize existing scholarship on how Black engineering students’ participation in identity-based organizations influences their academic and professional outcomes. Scope/Method: A systematic literature review methodology and thematic analysis was used to identify and synthesize findings from existing scholarship. Out of the 442 articles that were retrieved via database searches, 21 articles met all eligibility criteria after two rounds of screening. Results: There are four main outcomes of Black students’ participation in identity-based engineering organizations and programs: self-efficacy; a sense of belonging and community; various knowledge, skills, and attributes (KSAs); and professional success. The programming factors that facilitated these outcomes include: access to mentors and role models, attending social and professional development events, and active engagement in the organization and program. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that there are many benefits of identity-based professional societies and programs for Black students in engineering. Awareness of these outcomes and programming decisions has implications for researchers doing broadening participation work and practitioners overseeing these programs, which can help in increasing the number of Black engineers in higher education and the workforce.

Online engineering education is gaining increasing acceptance and recognition globally due to its benefits of accessibility, flexibility, and scalability. Prior research in online education has shown that it has enormous benefits for a wide range of students and learners. However, engineering education and research have been slower than other fields in adopting and investigating the online educational format. This paper presents a systematic literature review (SLR) on research in asynchronous online engineering education, with the goal of examining current knowledge related to this topic and supporting future scaling efforts. Thirty-nine publications between 2011 and 2020 met criteria to be included in the final synthesis phase of our review process. These studies were classified under five themes: content design and delivery, student engagement and interactions, assessment, feedback, and challenges. Findings related to each theme and their associated implications for research and practice are discussed in the paper. Additionally, a descriptive analysis of current trends in research on asynchronous online engineering education revealed (i) increasing interest in the online learning format by both researchers and practitioners over time, (ii) a majority of the research on this topic originating within the US, (iii) broad applicability of online learning across engineering disciplines, and (iv) a relatively large scope for the creation, testing, and application of theoretical and conceptual frameworks in the asynchronous online engineering learning space.

Despite an increasing interest in diversity and inclusion in engineering, there has been a stagnant trend in the enrollment of black graduate students while students from other racial minority groups have shown a steady increase over the last decade (Yoder, 2017). Where it might seem that more studies would seek to understand why this is the case for Black students, a recent review of the broadening participation in engineering and computer science literature found Black graduate students to be the most understudied demographic (London, Lee & Watford, 2017). Understanding how students transition from undergraduate studies and come to experience graduate studies in engineering could be particularly insightful in demystifying the enrollment and retention trends. The transition from undergraduate to graduate studies is a challenging adjustment for many students, often involving at least one of many factors including matriculating to a new institutional culture, moving to and living in a different region, getting acquainted with greater autonomy and having to identify new support structures. These components of transition have often been accompanied by additional stressors that can cause anxiety, depression, and loss of motivation to pursue higher education. Tinto's Model of Student Retention suggests the academic and social integration a student is able to establish within their university to be a critical influence on their decision to persist (Braxton, 2000). Many universities boast a variety of programs, organizations and support structures promoting academic and social integration among their student body; however, often these entities are focused on the undergraduate level and/or fail to prioritize the particular needs of students from underrepresented groups. For this reason, many underrepresented students seek to identify communities, referred to as counterspaces, where their marginalized identities can be empowered. According to Case and Hunter, counterspaces are "settings which promote positive self-concepts among marginalized individuals (e.g., racial and gender minorities, persons with disabilities, etc.) through challenging the deficit-oriented dominant cultural narratives and representations concerning these individuals." Counterspaces can come in many different forms having explicit connections to the profession (i.e., American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE)), identity (i.e., Black Greek Letter Organizations (BGLOs), or both (i.e., National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE)) (Case & Hunter, 2012). One study investigated the impact of participating in ethnic professional organizations (NSBE and the Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers (SHPE)) at the undergraduate level (Martin et al., 2016). However, the focus was solely on engineering related professional organizations and students that had attended a predominantly White institution (PWI). It is often assumed that continuity in the availability of and access to supports at the graduate level is comparable to that which was realized in students' undergraduate pursuits when in fact, to date, little is known regarding how graduate students identify and experience counterspaces to aid in the navigation of their engineering studies. It is possible that seeking out such structures could be arduous due to the differences in the responsibility, workload and needs of the student at the graduate level relative to what existed as an undergraduate student and particularly for students from marginalized populations. This study aims to explore how Black engineering students identify, engage in and experience counterspaces at the graduate level as a means of establishing adequate social integration to influence a desire to persist. Using a modified version of Tinto's Model of Student Retention as the theoretical framework and counter-storytelling—a tenet of Critical Race theory, as a lens—this project takes a phenomenological approach to understanding the process of establishing counterspaces for Black engineering graduate students. This study sought to address the following research questions: RQ1: How do Black students describe their needs for counterspaces in engineering doctoral programs? RQ2: How do Black graduate students identify counterspaces while navigating engineering environments? RQ3: How does engaging in counterspaces impact the experiences of Black engineering graduate students, assuming they are successfully identified? This study took utilized narrative interview methods to capture stories of the lived experience of Black graduate students in engineering. Specifically, there were three inclusion criteria for participants: (1) they had to identify as Black; (2) be a graduate student currently enrolled in a doctoral program in engineering at an institution in the United States; and (3) have engaged in either NSBE and/or BGLOs as an undergraduate student. As an initial recruitment effort, a demographic survey was deployed to targeted institutions through networks of Minority Engineering Program advocates and listservs associated with Black engineering organizations. The demographic survey contained information related to the study and consent documentation. It was noted that completion of the survey would indicate interest in participation in the study. More than 60 Black engineering graduate students completed the demographic survey as a result of the snowball sampling that occurred as students shared the study with their own professional networks and peers. Participants participated in narrative interviews that were initiated with a prompt that composed the narration phase. The prompt stimulated participants to share their experiences in navigating engineering through undergraduate and graduate school, including how they perceived facets of their identity and engagement with specific organizations to impact their experience. This encouraged participants to elaborate on their stories. Following this phase, a semi-structured approach was taken to follow-up on specific points based on the stories shared by participants in what is known as the conversation phase. The conversational phase consisted of questions meant to delve deeper into the experiences shared. In total, 37 participants completed interviews ranging in duration from 60 minutes to 90 minutes. Of the 37 participants, 17 students were identified to provide more context to their graduate experience. The participant sample was composed of 7 men and 10 women; 1st year (7), 2nd year (2), 3rd year (5), 4th year (2) and 5th year (1) graduate students representing Mechanical Engineering (6), Bioengineering (3), Chemical Engineering (2), Industrial Engineering (2), Electrical Engineering (1), Civil Engineering (1), Aerospace Engineering (1), and Engineering Education (1). Of the participants, 13 were domestic Black students and 4 were international Black students representative of the following nationalities: Kenyan, Nigerian, and Ethiopian. Students also represented a host of institutions across the country with 13 being from PWIs, 2 being from predominantly White institutions that serve large numbers of underrepresented students (PWI-Ds) ( i.e., Georgia Tech, University of Maryland Baltimore County, etc.) and 2 Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). Interviews were audio and video recorded and transcribed. Interview transcripts were taken to be the primary source of data. To analyze the data, deductive codes were created based on the research questions as the first cycle of coding. Among the codes created, support systems and impactful interactions, identity related experiences, culture and achievements and success, were selected to be most related to the aforementioned research questions. Pattern coding was applied as a second cycle analysis to identify bigger pictures and themes as related to students' experiences with counterspaces at the graduate level. Many of the participants reported feelings of isolation or being the "only" in the engineering spaces they occupied. Academic support was not mentioned as a prominent "need" as many of the students recognized that graduate school is a different level of rigor and emphasizes more independent research. However, having a space that allowed them to vent, express frustration, or motivate them to continue was something that was commonly sought. Students who engaged in counterspaces at their undergraduate institution were able to better identify their changing needs for social integration upon entering their graduate program, whereas the students who had not, did so as a result of a critical event, either academically or personally. Not all students articulated perceiving a change in their needs from their undergraduate experience as they began graduate programs. This, compounded with the strenuous nature of graduate education, led to feelings of frustration and lack of motivation, which resulted in them contemplating major changes, such as switching programs or advisors. Other students who were able to identify these counterspaces prior to or earlier in their programs were able to transition into their programs knowing how to leverage these spaces for the support that they needed specifically. Thus, a variety of counterspaces were utilized by the participants, largely based on academic interests, hobbies, or facets of their identities including service-based, technical, professional and religious units. The participants sought counterspaces as a way to feel inclusivity among like-minded peers. Additionally, students also reported utilizing counterspaces as a way to break up the rigor of their engineering discipline. This enabled them to separate from their engineering world and focus on their non-technical interests and hobbies. Counterspaces provide an avenue for Black graduate students in engineering to mitigate their feelings of isolation stemming from often being the only Black representatives in their academic fields. These counterspaces enhanced their willingness to persist in their programs during instances when they lacked motivation.

Introduction: The pursuit of education in engineering is a challenging endeavor for students. However, for Black students, this challenging experience is also coupled with racialized challenges such as experiences with racism, isolation, microaggressions, and visibility. This study focuses on the recommendations from Black graduate students in engineering to institutions. These recommendations explicitly focus on what institutions could do to enhance the experiences of Black students navigating their engineering education. This work uses an assets-based approach to prioritize the recommendations and reflections of those that have successfully navigated these environments. Awareness of the opportunities to enhance the collective experience of Black engineering students, as identified by current Black engineering graduate students, enables the establishment of an intentional agenda that institutions can employ to increase satisfaction, retention, and positive outcomes among Black engineering students. Theoretical Framework: The Person-Environment (PE) Fit Theory seeks to gauge the correlation between one's personality type and their environment to see if there is a "fit" between the two. It relies on the congruence between personal and situational factors to lead to positive outcomes such as persistence, satisfaction, or success. This work is situated in this theory as it supports the investigation of congruence described by Black graduate students and the academic environments they have navigated. The recommendations provided by participants will serve to highlight the areas where greater congruence is necessary to promote positive outcomes for the students. Methods: Graduate students currently enrolled in doctoral engineering programs were recruited for this study. A total of sixteen individuals participated in this study with all identifying as Black. The qualitative analysis of the data was conducted in two cycles. As a first-cycle analysis, transcripts were coded deductively for recommendations. The code 'recommendations' was defined as ideas, thoughts, and/or solutions stated by participants in suggesting ways that the experience for Black students could be improved. Recommendations. could apply to undergraduate and/or graduate level and be regarding any aspect of the engineering students' experiences from classes to student organizations. All excerpts coded as recommendations were then exported. Pattern coding was applied as a second-cycle coding mechanism to categorize recommendations according to their focus. Several categories, or themes, were derived from the recommendation data. Findings: The following three themes were the most reported across the participants. Underlying many of the recommendations was a desire for the institution to be intentional and accountable in their efforts to foster environments more inclusive to and aware of the Black student experiences. The specific themes were: faculty awareness and development, intentional recruitment and accountability, and metrics to assess diversity, equity, and inclusion. Faculty Awareness and Development: Participants conveyed an urgent need for faculty awareness and development, specifically in terms of their individual cultural competence, attitudes and behaviors around inclusivity, and empathy; to be mandated and monitored by institutions. Many students expressed a belief that opportunities to talk and share their experiences would aid in the development of material that could be utilized for effective interventions and training of faculty with the goals of promoting equity and inclusion at the forefront. Participants also shared similar sentiments related to faculty providing equal treatment to all students and better understanding the demographics, backgrounds, identities, and cultural norms of students with whom they work. Students expressed the significance of feeling supported by faculty, despite their ethnic backgrounds. Across the participants, the critical role that faculty play in students' satisfaction and success, was evident. Intentional Recruitment: Participants described an "easy" solution to the difficulty related to recruiting Black faculty and students—intentionality. The perception across the participants was that institutions lack intentionality in their recruitment of Black faculty and students, which influenced disbelief that institutions truly want different, and particularly, better, outcomes for Black students. Participants recognized the importance of critical mass and urged that representation matters. Myriad solutions to enhance recruitment were provided such as having institutions attend the National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE) Annual Convention and diversifying administrations in a way that would influence top-down foci on diversity. However, at the core of a complex problem in underrepresentation, a low-hanging strategy that institutions are not currently perceived to employ is intentionality about Black representation at their institution, and in engineering, specifically. Accountability and Metrics to Assess Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion: The participants recommended that schools be required to design tools for JEDI assessments of their engineering programs after expressing their disappointment in their program's efforts. Alongside this was the recommendation to follow-up on surveys administered to students. Many participants explicitly interpreted institutions' inaction as a lack of accountability, which impacts their decision to contribute to and complete continued JEDI-related surveys. Establishing clear metrics and a system of accountability will enable the creation of a sustained inclusive environment with success as more than mere quantitative demographic targets, but reflecting back to the voices of those on the other side of the experiences to see if they can "feel" the institutions' efforts to improve the culture, available resources and supports for Black students. Conclusion: Utilizing recommendations from students who have navigated these spaces provides first-hand insight that should be prioritized in efforts to improve these engineering environments. As engineering programs seek to enhance such experiences, students' recommendations are an ideal starting place to anchor their agenda of reform. In interpreting the applicability of this work, it is critical to note that the data collected reflected concerns with diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice though predating national attention to these issues. This speaks to the endured injustices, as perceived by Black students, that are seemingly only recently entering the national conversation as the focus has been on diversity, and more recently inclusion, but less on the ideals promoting and/or inhibiting them such as systemic racism. Given the opportunity to conduct this study in the current moment, it is plausible that students' experiences and/or needs could be exacerbated in this sociopolitical climate. It is time that the voices of those on the experiential side of oppression be amplified and responded to. As recommended by the participants, intentionality is paramount for the first steps toward change and we are hopeful that this work will support institutional knowledge in opportunities to better support Black students.

Overview: This panel discussion will gather journal editors and associate editors, authors, and reviewers from the engineering education research (EER) community to discuss how to take action that will increase diversity, equity and inclusivity in EER publications and communications. Specifically, we seek to engage in a frank discussion of how publication practices and policies affect traditionally marginalized populations in EER, and identify ways that we can implement more equitable and inclusive practices and policies. Panelists will give short presentations on their roles in academic publishing and the steps they have taken to make academic publishing more diverse, equitable and inclusive. This will be followed by a moderated discussion among the panelists, with predetermined prompts as a well as questions fielded from the audience. The outcome of this panel discussion will be actionable steps that can be shared throughout EER to create a more diverse, equitable and inclusive community through our academic publications and communications. Introduction: Recent events, specifically the COVID-19 pandemic and increased activity around the Black Lives Matter movement, have given rise for calls for the EER community to "authentically listen to those who have historically been silenced — we who possess unearned societal benefits have something to learn" (Vanasupa, 2020, p. 4). Published articles and guest editorials outline the issues at hand related to a lack of diversity in engineering (Pawley, 2019; Burt, 2020), and a lack of inclusivity in our educational practices (Cech, 2013). Other published editorials (e.g., Riley, Foster & Karlin, 2020) and presentations (Pawley, 2019; Benson, 2020) identify ways to take action, with the understanding that we are at a pivotal point in our societal discourse where listening and learning are no longer enough to move toward diversity, equity and inclusion. Those of us who are active in academic publishing in the EER community have a platform for bringing about social change through our respective roles as editors, authors and reviewers. Journal editors and members of editorial boards are in some ways the vanguards of engineering education research and publishing as they set guidelines for authors and reviewers, coordinate messages about the vision and mission of their respective journals and publishers, and guide new research through the publication process. However, academic journals do not always provide specific messaging about how to write, review, edit, and publish research with diversity, equity and inclusivity at the forefront. Some initiatives have been undertaken by EER journals. For example, the editor for the Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, Julie Martin, wrote in an editorial about expectations for reviewers to be constructive rather than destructive (Martin, 2020). Martin provided explicit instructions for reviewers to consider their own positionality, or their position in relation to the social and political context of the study – the community, the organization, or the participant group (Hampton & Reeping, 2019). Positionality statements allow a reader to see "how the researchers viewed their own internal conversation with their identity and the identity of those being studied" (Hampton & Reeping, 2019, pp. 3–4). A researcher (or reviewer's) personality includes personal and philosophical perspectives and influences a study's research design, methods, and worldview (Hampton & Reeping, 2019). Therefore, a researcher's implicit or explicit bias has the potential for influencing the data collection, analysis, and interpretation in qualitative studies and the interpretation in quantitative studies (Hampton & Reeping, 2019). Thus, without explicit positionality statements, authors and reviewers do not discuss how they have critically reflected on their own identities and could influence how research is conducted and reviewed, which could perpetuate systemic racism. Outside of the EER community, there are initiatives and resources that could be leveraged to promote diversity and inclusive practices within the academic communications ecosystem, for example the Joint Statement of Principles by the Coalition for Diversity and Inclusion in Scholarly Communication (C4DISC). C4DISC promotes diversity and inclusive practices within the scholarly communications ecosystem, and is working to eliminate barriers to participation, create a space that respects diverse traditions, heritages, and experiences, as well as promote diversity in all staff, volunteers, and audiences (C4DISC, n.d.). How do we increase diversity on editorial boards and pools of peer reviewers for EER journals? Other important considerations include how we refer to gender, disability, race and ethnicity, among other characteristics, in our publications. The American Psychological Association (APA) has provided an online guide based on their updated 7th Edition Handbook about bias-free language and urges authors to "to use language that is free of bias and avoid perpetuating prejudicial beliefs or demeaning attitudes in their writing" (APA, n.d.). But there are conflicting opinions on issues such as capitalization of racialized groups (Appiah, 2020; Law, 2020). How should authors and editors refer to diverse types of people in engineering in ways that are inclusive and respectful? Positionality statements, diverse appointments and bias-free language are just a few examples of the many issues that need to be frankly discussed and acted on in the EER community from the perspective of our research publications and communication venues such as conferences. The proposed panel discussion will focus on identifying actions such as drafting guiding documents (i.e., author and reviewer guidelines), targeted training (i.e., online resources for writing positionality statements), and policies that can be adopted by any EER journal or conference (for example, acceptable formats for referring to human research subjects, and strategies for creating more diverse editorial boards). Panel Members: The proposed panel session seeks to assemble a diverse group of individuals representing a variety of voices and roles, particularly those who have been champions for diversity, equity and inclusivity. • Representing EER Journal Editorial Boards: Two journal editors and associate editors will be invited to participate, particularly those involved with initiatives related to diversity, equity and inclusivity, for example: o Julie Martin, Editor, Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering o Denise Simmons, Associate Editor, Journal of Engineering Education • Representing EER Authors: Two recently published authors working in the diversity, equity and inclusivity space will be invited to participate, for example: o Brian A. Burt, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Educational Policy and Leadership, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Research Scientist in the Wisconsin Equity & Inclusion Laboratory (Wei LAB) o Cassandra McCall, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Engineering Education, Utah State University • Representing EER Reviewers: Two recently active reviewers whose research focuses on diversity, equity and inclusivity, will be invited to participate, for example: o James Holly, Jr., Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Urban STEM Education, Wayne State University; participant in the Journal of Engineering Education Mentored Reviewer Program; and the 2020-2021 Program Chair for the ASEE provisional division of Equity, Culture, Social Justice in Education (ECSJ) o Kelly Cross, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Chemical Engineering at the University of Nevada, Reno; inclusive excellence researcher and Safe Zone trainer. • Co-Moderators: o Lisa Benson, Editor, Journal of Engineering Education (JEE) o JEE Intern for Diversity, Equity and Inclusivity (TBA) (Note: JEE recently initiated this internship program; the first intern has not yet been named but will be identified by Fall 2020. Alternatively, the current JEE Communications Intern, Victoria Sellers, Ph.D., will co-moderate.) Panel Session Structure and Discussion Prompts: After introducing each panelist and co-moderators, we anticipate each panelist spending 4 – 5 minutes describing what they believe to be the most pressing issues facing academic research editors, authors, and reviewers, and initiatives already under way, related to diversity, equity and inclusivity (30 minutes total). An open discussion will follow. Discussion prompts will be prepared and posed to the panelists by the JEE intern co-moderator. Sample prompts are provided below, but identifying important topics and discussion points will be part of the JEE intern's duties. Audience members will also be able to ask questions through an online portal such as Slido (sli.do) or Menti (www.menti.com), which will be fielded and organized by topic by co-moderator Benson. • What actions can we take to guide reviewers in writing constructive reviews to ensure that manuscript submissions are treated equitably? • There are conflicting opinions in publications about capitalization of descriptive terms such as those referring to race, ethnicity and disability. What are the roles and responsibilities of editors, authors and reviewers to stay up to date on current practices in academic publishing related to inclusive language? • How should editors and reviewers provide feedback to authors on the use of appropriate, up-to-date, bias-free language when referring to people and groups of people in human subjects research? • How can we as a community facilitate selection of diverse reviewers for conference and journal papers? • What actions can we as a community take to foster and promote diverse conference program chairs and journal editorial board members? References: American Psychological Association (APA) (n.d.). Bias-Free Language. Retrieved from https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/bias-free-language/. Appiah, K. A. (2020). The Case for Capitalizing the B in Black. The Atlantic. June 18, 2020. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/time-to-capitalize-blackand-white/613159/. Benson, L. (2020). Talking the Talk, Walking the Walk: What our Academic Publications Say about Us as a Community. Education and Research Methods (ERM) Division Distinguished Lecture, Annual ASEE Conference and Exposition, June 24, 2020. Burt, B. (2019). Broadening Participation in the Engineering Professoriate: Influences on Allen's Journey in Developing Professorial Intentions. Journal of Engineering Education, 109(4) (accepted for publication). Cech, E. A. (2013). The (mis)framing of social justice: Why ideologies of depoliticization and meritocracy hinder engineers' ability to think about social injustices. In J. Lucena (Ed.), Engineering education for social justice. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. Coalition for Diversity and Inclusion in Scholarly Communications (C4DISC). (n.d.). Joint Statement of Principles, Retrieved from https://c4disc.org/principles/. Hampton, C. & Reeping, D. (2019). Positionality: The Stories of Self that Impact Others. Proceedings of the 2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Tampa, FL, June 16-19, 2019. Law, M. (2020). Why we capitalize 'Black' (and not 'white'). Columbia Journalism Review, June 16, 2020. Retrieved from https://www.cjr.org/analysis/capital-b-black-styleguide.php?fbclid=IwAR3seIA7M5P7BskEPh6RpwU3nmVd5u_3yQAf2YGg6fs86LnMa31LxHVF8Q0 Martin, J. (2020). Time for a Culture Change – Moving Academia from Destructive to Constructive Feedback. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering 26(1):v–vii. Pawley, A. L. (2019). "Asking questions, we walk": How should engineering education address equity, the climate crisis, and its own moral infrastructure? Journal of Engineering Education, 108(3):447-452. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20295 Riley, D., Foster, E.K. and Karlin, J. (2020), Show up and disrupt. Journal of Engineering Education, 109: 7-10. doi:10.1002/jee.20305 Vanasupa, L. (2020). From 2020 vision: Engineering education that honors the whole. Journal of Engineering Education, 109(3). doi:10.1002/jee.20327.

Background: Black engineering graduate students represent a critical and understudied population in engineering education. Gaining an understanding of the lived experiences of Black engineering graduate students while they are simultaneously weathering two pandemics, COVID-19 and systemic racism, is of paramount importance.Purpose/Hypothesis: Black engineering graduate students hold a unique duality, as both Black people in the United States and Black graduate students in US engineering programs that espouse white supremacist ideals. Their real-world experiences necessitate understanding, and this paper highlights the related impact on the students themselves, their adaptations to the pandemics, and how those adaptations relate to and affect their support needs and navigation of their engineering academic environments.Design/Method: An interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA) approach was combined with community-based participatory action research and was situated in Boykin's Triple Quandary. A family check-in was conducted with 10 Black engineering graduate students enrolled in doctoral programs across the country to delve deep into their lived experience as a cultural community.Results: Findings include an emergent framework of Black engineering graduate student values in response to the pandemics. These values aligned with the Black Cultural Ethos, demonstrating an adoption of collectivistic cultural values in times of crises. Further, COVID-19 and systemic racism differentially impacted Black engineering graduate students and, thus, the manifestations of their values.Conclusion: For institutions to be able to effectively support their Black engineering graduate students, they must gain awareness of the students' experiences, values, and needs, in general, and amid crises specifically. The findings presented here provide a critical window into this information.

Introduction: Mental health has become an emergent issue across the United States, especially with respect to graduate students. Graduate students are often faced with a wide variety of academic, professional, and personal challenges across their academic journeys that can impact their persistence in their graduate programs. In their study of graduate student mental health, Hyun, Quinn, Madon, and Lustig demonstrated that many graduate students express negative emotional responses to stress that impact their wellbeing and academic performance. Black graduate students in engineering deal with additional scrutiny, such as microaggressions, racism, and other racialized experiences throughout their journey. These challenges often exacerbate the effects of negative emotional responses, especially when aspects of their identity threatened. The purpose of this study is to understand the experiences of Black graduate students in engineering and the emotions associated with those experiences, addressing the research questions: What are the emotions associated with navigating engineering as described by Black graduate students? What might be implications for Black graduate student mental health based on the emotions described? Theoretical Framework: This work is anchored in Linnenbrick-Garcia and Pekrun's Circumplex Model of Affect framework, where emotions are categorized according to the intersection of affect and activation. Affective states, or dimensions of valence, are emotions or moods and can be described as positive (or pleasant) or as negative (or unpleasant). Activation refers to energy, or stimulation, and can be expressed cognitively and/or physiologically. Using the Circumplex Model of Affect provides insight to the valence and activation of emotions which will enable a deeper insight into the emotions experienced. Situated in knowledge that negative affect, high activation emotions contribute to cognitive overload, which directly impacts mental health, learning more about experiences of Black students navigating engineering and their associated emotions could add to our understanding of macrolevel influences in their experiences while identifying opportunities to better support Black students' success through structures, policies, and resources. Methods: This study adopted narrative interview methods to capture the lived experiences of Black graduate students in engineering with a focus on identifying the emotions associated with their stories. The inclusion criteria for this study required participants identify as Black, be enrolled in an accredited doctoral engineering program, and have engaged in either the National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE) and/or Black Greek Letter Organizations (BGLOs) as an undergraduate student. A total of 5 individuals (Female, n= 3; Male, n= 2) participated in this study. Emotion coding was used for the first-cycle coding method in efforts to capture both the explicit and implicit emotions expressed in participants' narrative recounts of their experiences in engineering. Emotion coding uses an inductive approach to apply emotions to excerpts as participants describe their experience. Aspects such as tone, verbiage and expressions were used to identify emotions that were not directly verbally communicated. Between the first and second cycle of coding, the technique of code mapping was utilized to categorize the raw emotions from the stories into appropriate categories as a means of organizing similar data. The research team reviewed and coded the transcripts and then discussed the code applications collectively to confer on agreement regarding the code application and interpretation of the emotions. Finally, the Circumplex Model of Affect was applied as a structural coding technique to properly classify the emotion categories with respect to activation energy (high or low) and valence (positive or negative). Once the emotions were classified, the stimuli surrounding the emotions were analyzed and themes were presented regarding the emotional navigation of engineering for Black graduate students. Findings: The findings of this study demonstrated engineering to be experienced in unique ways depending on the settings and student involved, which ultimately led to variable perspectives and expressions of emotions across the participants. Across all of the participant stories, there was a plethora of emotions expressed both explicitly and implicitly. A total of 44 distinct emotions were identified across the experiences of the participants, which were then separated into four categories via the Circumplex Model: (+,+)*, high-activation with positive valence (8), (-,+)*, low-activation with positive valence (8), (+,-)*, high-activation with negative valence (17), and (-,-)*, low-activation with negative valence (11). Negative valence emotions were more prevalent across the stories of the Black engineering graduate students, accounting for over 60% of the emotions identified in their stories. And more, when activation energy and affect are simultaneously considered, the number of high-activation, negative affect emotions greatly outweigh the number of low activation, negative affect emotions. Discussion and Implications: This study explores the range of emotions that Black graduate students experience while navigating engineering academic environments. We found the greatest frequency of emotions to be those categorized as high activation, negative affect, the most negatively impactful of the categorized emotions. Enduring high-activation, negative emotions over time can have implications for anxiety, depression and other mental health concerns, due to their high energy cost. While researchers have explored the effect of emotions for the general engineering population, Black engineering doctoral students navigate engineering spaces unlike their majoritarian counterparts. The disaggregation of these stories helps to elucidate the lived emotions of these students, and how they differ based on their perceptions of the experience This study warrants continued investigation into emotions and their link to mental health for Black engineering graduate students. Consideration of mental health is critical and rooted in effective efforts to broaden participation in engineering, which rests in better understanding of Black students' experiences in engineering as reflective of its normalized culture. At the core of these efforts is the goal of promoting accountability through the elucidation of opportunities for macrolevel structures to support and provide what is needed for all students' success. This could include revisiting institutional policies, incorporating sensitivity training goals for faculty, and further investigation into student and faculty interactions. Future work will involve discussion of the greater implications of how these emotions impact students' mental health and trajectories as well as deeper investigation of the critical incidents eliciting significant emotional responses.

Purpose NSF (2016) reported that Black students received just 6.2 percent of U.S. science and engineering bachelor's degrees. Whereas Black women only held 2% of science and engineering jobs. This is a significant underrepresentation of gender and race (NSF, 2013). However, the data cited does not differentiate Black women from immigrant backgrounds holding STEM jobs. The generic term of Black identity does not include other cultural and ethnic identities with immigrant background. A specific focus on the Black immigrant women's college experience appears to be lacking within the literature. While defining the term immigrant, we used the definition provided by the Migration Policy Institute: foreign-born immigrant refers to persons with no U.S. citizenship at birth; they were born outside the United States. And then, the second generation refers to immigrants who are U.S.-born children of immigrants. It's essential to investigate their college experiences to create a successful and equitable space. The research questions asked for this study are: 1. What are the experiences of utilizing available on-campus services of the Black immigrant women pursuing Engineering? 2. What are the recommendations identified by those students to lessen the gap in needed services and support? Theoretical Framework Critical race theory (CRT) is the theoretical framework for our study. One of our epistemological assumptions is color blind policies systematically disadvantage people of color and further creates more inequities. Also, critical race theory encouraged us to generate counter-narratives in the form of discussion, archives, and testimonies because it acknowledges that some groups are socially and culturally marginalized, and their marginalized stories based on their experiences could challenge the dominant practices and can bring changes (Delgado and Stefancic, 2001; Villalpando and Bernal, 2002). Our theoretical framework informed the interview protocol, deductive coding, and the findings. Methodology In this study, we specifically examined the experiences of immigrant women who identified themselves as undergraduate engineering students attending a 4-year public research University located in the South- West of the United States. The data was collected through semi-structured narrative interviews from 10 participants enrolled in engineering programs. The participants first completed a demographic survey. Then we conducted the semi-structured interviews, which were targeted to focus on experiences with departmental culture, campus support, mentoring and faculty interactions, and professional development and future plans to unpack the marginalized experiences of the students. Each interview lasted between 45 minutes to an hour. Participants received $50 as an incentive for participation in the research study. The interviews were audio-recorded with the consent of participants. As a first-cycle analysis, transcripts were coded deductively. For this study, we focused on-campus support, that means we reported data from student recommendations, their experience of utilizing on-campus services, challenges they faced and gaps in needed support. To ensure the accuracy of the data, member checking and intercoder reliability were implemented. Tentative Findings The research is ongoing, and the results thus far are general and tentative. Student Experience When exploring students' experience with on-campus services we found that students valued peer to peer support on campus. For example, they relied on the Black African Coalition, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and other multicultural-biracial support groups. Also, students mentioned professional resources like BLAST, which is Barrett leadership and service team, and fellowships offered through the Center for Gender Equity in Science and Technology. Then students also nurtured their interests like gardening and wood printing through on-campus clubs during the pandemic. However, most of them reported a lack of peer to staff and faculty relationship. Students also mentioned that interaction with staff and faculty members who identify as one of them is missing in their college experience. Another pertinent theme that emerged from the data was the struggle to find basic information; for example, lack of information about transferring credit to save money and the process of transferring the courses with the degree program. Students reported that they often did not know about essential resources like online tutoring services, mentor programs which should be introduced to them formally from the first day of college. Also, students reported a lack of supports for upper-division engineering classes. Our findings suggested that there is a lack of program-specific academic resources for the students. A major concern also emerged from the data that due to overall negative experiences, some students might not continue their specific degree programs. Recommendations from Students • Financial worries remained a constant stressor for most of the participants. Students recommended that the department should consider awarding more scholarships. • Under the umbrella of black identity, the clubs also should consider to explore different black identities like Haitian culture, Caribbean culture, African culture. There is no oneness of black identity. • Students recommended providing an easy access guide to scholarships and other resources available to them. • Students also suggested connecting the mentorship path with women engineering professors and postdocs of color from the freshman year to build a robust mentor-mentee network within the engineering school. • Tracking students if they are staying in their major after completion of degree and then revise the specific degree program based on their suggestions. • Students recommended detailed talk on cultural appropriation and gender inequity. One student said, "because women honestly do not understand what they are protected under". • Our participants conveyed an immediate need to hire more black administrators and to invite more women of color at the career fair. Significance This paper will hopefully create dialogues around the experiences of Black immigrant women in engineering, and their voice will reach the policymakers and educators nationally so that they are better supported in their programs. This paper also aims to identify the gaps in needed support and services directly from the students. Recommendations from the students are the stepping stone to re-evaluate the student need at the departmental and institutional level. Also, we believe some of our findings might have implications for other marginalized groups. To this end, this paper connects to the conference theme of understanding inclusion, equity, access, and diversity to broaden participation focused on the issues such as intersectionality of race and gender.