Content uploaded by Fernanda Cruz Rios
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Fernanda Cruz Rios on Dec 09, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Proposed framework: The role of the universities
Introduction
Native American attainment in engineering education:
The role of the universities
Proposed framework: Faculty hiring
Fernanda Cruz-Rios*, Mounir El Asmar, David Grau, & Kristen Parrish
School of Sustainable Engineering and the Built Environment, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona | *Corresponding author: fcrios@asu.edu | NSF Award #1542731: Producing Native American PhDs and Professors in Engineering
Project description
Results
Acknowledgments References
•A diverse faculty is key to innovation, academic
excellence, and to the academic success of
underrepresented minority URM students [1-4].
•Native Americans (NAs) are the most URM in
engineering [5].
•NAs in science and engineering may experience a
disconnection between their field of study and their
values [6].
•Research has shown that honoring the NA’s desire to
giving back to their communities has helped NAs to
persist and excel in academia [3,7,8].
•Family support, institutional support, and tribal
community support are interdependent and key to the
performance and persistence of NAs in academia [7].
Factors that contribute to NA attainment in academia.
Based on [6] and [7].
Objective: To understand the role of universities in improving
NA recruitment, retention, and success in engineering
education, from undergraduate to faculty.
Method: The authors interviewed 29 NA engineering
undergraduate (UG) students and four Ph.D. students from
research universities in Arizona, and 24 engineering deans
across the country (from the universities with higher NA
enrollment or located in states with the highest NA
population). Researchers conducted qualitative thematic data
analysis and coding.
[1] Nelson, D. J., & Brammer, C. N. (2010). “A national analysis of minorities in science and engineering
faculties at research universities.” University of Oklahoma.
[2] Leggon, C. B. (2010). “Diversifying science and engineering faculties: Intersections of race, ethnicity,
and gender.” American Behavioral Scientist, 53(7), 1013-1028.
[3] Dvorakova, A. (2018). “Contextual identity experiencing facilitates resilience in Native American
academics. The Social Science Journal, 55, 346-358.
[4] Tapia, R. (2010, March). “Broadening participation: Hiring and developing minority faculty at research
universities.” Communications of the ACM, 53(3).
[5] Snyder, T. D., de Brey, C., & Dillow, S. A. (2019). “Digest of education statistics 2017.” National
Center for Research Statistics, U.S. Department of Education,
[6] Windchief, S., & Brown, B. (2017). “Conceptualizing a mentoring program for American
Indian/Alaska Native students in STEM fields: A review of the literature.” Mentoring & Tutoring:
Partnership in Learning, 25(3), 329-345.
[7] Lopez, J. D. (2017). “Factors influencing American Indian and Alaska Native postsecondary
persistence: AI/AN MilleniumFalcon Persistence Model.” Research in Higher Education, 59(6), 792–811.
[8] Brayboy, B. M. (2005). “Transformational resistance and social justice: American Indians in Ivy
League universities.” Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 36(3), 193-211.
•NA UG students found it difficult to give back to their
communities through their engineering degrees. They
mentioned a lack of engineering jobs in the tribal lands, and
concerns about the environmental impact of the field.
•NA Ph.D. students had a common desire to contribute to
societal achievement, and 75% had the purpose to
contributing to tribal community and/or NA education.
•All NA Ph.D. students identified faculty mentorship as a
vital source of support for their persistence in academia.
•Engineering Deans are struggling to recruit and retain NA
students, and mostly to hire NA faculty.
•Engineering schools are failing to support the NA desire of
contributing to their community by not engaging with tribes
in terms of research and service.
•Most universities fail to address the differences between
URM groups when designing diversity hire strategies, and
60% did not have formal strategies in place.
This work was supported by the National
Science Foundation Broadening Participation
in Engineering program, EEC. The authors
would also like to thank the University Office
of Evaluation and Education Effectiveness
(UOEEE) at Arizona State University for the
help in coding and analyzing the data. Finally,
the authors thank Dr. Bryan Brayboy and
Jacob Moore for their invaluable feedback.