A dynamical systems model for investigating diversity

The goal of this paper is to present a conceptual model which can be used to investigate many important, complex psychosocial issues in engineering education. The model is based on a three-dimensional dynamical systems model and uses the concepts of orbits, perturbations, identity functions, and maximum likelihood estimators. The model is particularly useful for helping engineers to visualize and articulate their identities. Recent research indicates that one of the major contributing factors to the lack of diversity in engineering is the conflict between non-traditional persons' internal identities and the available engineering identities in practice. In order to capture this conflict, the model includes the dimensions of internal perspective (how one feels), projected perspective (how one behaves), and perceived perspective (how others respond). Mathematical identity functions in the three dimensions represent congruence, that is, a lack of contradiction between dimensions. For issues such as self-confidence, gender, ethnicity/race, and sexual orientation, this model is a useful tool to consider how these concepts are constructed within and between individuals. For example, within engineering practice, projecting self-confidence and independence is an important attribute for success: yet, many cultures teach some people (e.g., women and particular ethnic groups) to NOT display selfconfidence and to focus on interdependence. This conflict between what the culture of engineering practice expects and what people are socialized to feel is an example of incongruence between the internal and projected dimensions. This paper illustrates the model in detail, applying it to gender and gender's influence in engineering education. In addition, it discusses the validity of the model and demonstrates its use as a research tool.

[1]  Deborah Tannen,et al.  Talking from 9 to 5 : women and men in the workplace : language, sex and power , 1995 .

[2]  Henry Etzkowitz,et al.  Athena Unbound: Acknowledgements , 2000 .

[3]  Margaret P. Tongue WHAT DRIVES DIVERSITY , 2002 .

[4]  D. Clayson,et al.  Redheads and Blonds: Stereotypic Images , 1986 .

[5]  Karl A. Smith,et al.  How to Model It: Problem Solving for the Computer Age , 1994 .

[6]  J. Ogbu,et al.  Cultural problems in minority education: Their interpretations and consequences—Part one: Theoretical background , 1995 .

[7]  P. Willis Learning to Labor: How Working-Class Kids Get Working-Class Jobs , 1976 .

[8]  J. S. Hallett,et al.  “Uh-huh. What's That All About?” , 1998 .

[9]  M. Eisenhart,et al.  Educated in Romance: Women, Achievement, and College Culture , 1991 .

[10]  H. Dryburgh WORK HARD, PLAY HARD , 1999 .

[11]  B. Uzzi,et al.  Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science and Technology , 2000 .

[12]  Patti Lather Research as Praxis , 1986 .

[13]  Henry Etzkowitz,et al.  Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science and Technology , 2000 .

[14]  L. Grant,et al.  Women in Engineering: Gender, Power, and Work Place Culture. , 1993 .

[15]  Linda C. Schmidt,et al.  Student Focus Group Results on Student Team Performance Issues , 2000 .

[16]  Christine L. Williams,et al.  MAKEUP AT WORK , 1997 .

[17]  H. Mahler,et al.  The Effects Of Hair Color And Cosmetic Use On Perceptions Of A Female's Ability , 1996 .

[18]  R. Weitz WOMEN AND THEIR HAIR , 2001 .

[19]  K. Crittenden,et al.  By your attributions you shall be known: Consequences of attributional accounts for professional and gender identities , 1992 .