Using Literacy to Identify Hidden Factors That Jeopardize Equity in Engineering Education

• In Event: Intersections of Equity, Engineering, and Literacy: Exploring Possible Presents, Building Possible Futures

Abstract

Purpose
Literacies are central to the social and cultural practices that are intertwined with identities, who gets to participate, and the knowledge that is valued in engineering. However, identifying these literacies is not a straightforward process for engineering faculty. The purpose of this project was to help engineering faculty identify equity-oriented literacies that challenge hidden curriculum frameworks in engineering. We report on how engineering faculty identified and analyzed ways to translate equity-oriented literacy instruction strategies into practice for inclusive engineering teaching.

Theoretical Framework
Content taught in engineering classrooms plays an important role in the academic, personal, and professional development of the students. Often what counts as “objective” knowledge in some types of curriculum, such as engineering, is often one-sided and ignores the realities of others (Giroux & Penna, 1979). The hidden curriculum, or the unspoken or implicit academic, social, and cultural messages communicated to students (Margolis, 2001), is so powerful in engineering that an ethnocentric, male-dominated way of thinking has permeated through the engineering discipline (Tonso, 1996; Walker, 2001). The content and practice of engineering has largely been established by White middle-class men who have ultimately decided what is “engineering” (Riley et al., 2014).

Thus, despite the wealth of research related to literacy in STEM education and its importance in achieving equity and acknowledging different ways of knowing, engineering literacy hasn’t made great headway in engineering classrooms, possibly because it can be perceived as ill-fitted for the discipline (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2012). We argue that by understanding engineering literacies, the comprehension and creation of written texts, and the ability to locate, evaluate, and produce discipline specific texts (Wilson, Smith, & Householder, 2014), engineering instructors can develop a pedagogy, curriculum, and classroom structures that offset the damaging features of the engineering hidden curriculum (Giroux & Penna, 1979).

Methods
The Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers (SHPE) invites 25 Hispanic/Latinx individuals to the Faculty Development Institute (FDI) every year during its annual conference. We facilitated a workshop during FDI aimed at introducing faculty to engineering literacies and how to use different literacies to develop pedagogy, curriculum, and classroom practices that challenge the hidden curriculum in engineering. The 90-minute session included 5 minutes for introduction, 20 minutes of presentation, 25 minutes for an engineering activity, 20 minutes for reflection and lesson planning exercise, and 20 minutes for discussion. Participants completed a pre- and post-survey, responded to peer feedback, and submitted a plan for implementation of engineering literacies in their curriculum. The workshop was audio recorded to identify themes and codes related to literacy practices that challenge dominant paradigms in engineering.

Results
This study contributes to the growing literature on engineering literacy and hidden curriculum by presenting the ways in which engineering knowledge is constructed.

Significance
By examining critically not just how the students acquire knowledge but why and how “knowledge” is presented collectively in engineering, educators have an opportunity to challenge the dynamics and assumptions underlying specific normative practices in engineering that impact access, equity, and diversity in the field.

Authors

• Joel Alejandro Mejia, University of San Diego

• Idalis Villanueva, Utah State University

• Renata Alejandra Revelo Alonso, University of Illinois at Chicago