Available via license: CC BY
Content may be subject to copyright.
Citation: Lewis, R.S.; Fletcher, T.;
Paul, A.; Abdullah, D.; Sealey, Z.V.
Using SenseMaker®to Understand
the Prioritization of Self-Care and
Mental Health of Minoritized
Engineering Students during the 2020
Global Pandemic. Educ. Sci. 2023,13,
643. https://doi.org/10.3390/
educsci13070643
Academic Editor: Palitha Edirisingha
Received: 30 January 2023
Revised: 13 June 2023
Accepted: 17 June 2023
Published: 23 June 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
education
sciences
Article
Using SenseMaker®to Understand the Prioritization of Self-Care
and Mental Health of Minoritized Engineering Students
during the 2020 Global Pandemic
Racheida S. Lewis 1, * , Trina Fletcher 2,*, Animesh Paul 1, Diane Abdullah 2and Zaniyah V. Sealey 1
1Engineering Education Transformations Institute (EETI), University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA
2School of Universal Computing, Construction & Engineering Education (SUCCEED),
Florida International University, Miami, FL 33174, USA
*Correspondence: rslewis@uga.edu (R.S.L.); trfletch@fiu.edu (T.F.)
Abstract:
The 2020 global pandemic caused by COVID-19 forced higher education institutions to
immediately stop face-to-face teaching and transition to virtual instruction. This transition has been
difficult for engineering education, which has strong hardware, software, and practical/laboratory
components, and has further exacerbated the personal and professional experiences of minoritized
students in engineering. This study sought to answer the following overarching research question:
How has the abrupt transition to online instruction due to COVID-19 affected students traditionally underrepresented
in engineering? The abrupt transition for minoritized students and their decision to prioritize their
mental health was further explored to answer the following: (1) How many minoritized students
chose to prioritize their mental health? (2) How do minoritized students describe their experiences
and choices to prioritize (or not) their mental health? Using SenseMaker, participants shared stories
using the following prompt: Imagine you are chatting with a friend or family member about the evolving
COVID-19 crisis. Tell them about something you have experienced recently as an engineering student.
After completing their narrative, a series of triadic, dyadic, and sentiment-based multiple-choice
questions were presented. Student responses varied, including positive experiences, which resulted
in a strong prioritization, while others had negative experiences resulting in varied prioritizations.
Some students chose to prioritize their mental health to remain mentally and emotionally healthy;
some with negative experiences abandoned self-care strategies in order to tend to the needs of
academics and family. Participants’ decisions to prioritize their mental health were not monolithic.
Keywords:
self-care; mental health; engineering; COVID-19; minoritized students; global pandemic
1. Introduction
The COVID-19 global pandemic, which hit the United States in early spring 2020,
forced higher education institutions to immediately stop face-to-face teaching and transition
to virtual instruction. As of February 2021, the pandemic is still in full force, placing most
of the nation’s institutions in a majority remote learning and teaching environment for the
third semester straight, fourth if counting summer 2020 [
1
]. The impacts of the pandemic on
higher education programs have led to the closure of academic programs, faculty and staff
layoffs, and loss of income from on-campus dining and housing, which has led to an overall
negative impact on budgets and fiscal outlooks [
2
]. STEM academic programs that have
extensive requirements linked to software, hardware (i.e., laptops, desktop computers),
and labs, have taken a hard hit in meeting those demands remotely [
3
]. When focusing
on engineering education, there have been strong efforts to broaden the participation of
minoritized students including women, first-generation students, and low socioeconomic
status students (LSESs) [
4
]. Preliminary research covering the pandemic’s impact on
engineering students is finding that many of them, especially minoritized students, are
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070643 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/education
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 2 of 18
being negatively impacted, personally and professionally, due to the abrupt and ongoing
nature of the pandemic [5,6].
1.1. Background
The abrupt transition to virtual learning has been difficult for many students taking
STEM courses, particularly engineering, which has a strong practical/laboratory compo-
nent [
7
]. Additionally, the ongoing implications and uncertainty surrounding the COVID-19
pandemic have further exacerbated the personal and professional experiences of minori-
tized students in engineering. To better understand the impact of the pandemic on minori-
tized students’ experiences, the research study was guided by the following overarching
research question: How has the abrupt transition to online instruction due to COVID-19 affected
students traditionally underrepresented in engineering? In the process of analyzing results, a
significant finding arose around the area of self-care. While public health officials have urged
people to practice self-care and to take care of their mental health, to the point that several
mental health services have been provided at a discounted rate or for free, challenges still exist.
Additionally, despite the national call and efforts to promote self-care, our results found that
very few minoritized engineering students felt they had the privilege to do so.
One could hypothesize that the recommendations consistently communicated by
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to practice social distancing and
maintain a minimum of 6 feet apart from those you do not reside with has played a role in
this. People are naturally social beings; therefore, adhering to the advice to socially isolate
coupled with the rigor of engineering and the added pressure of finishing a once-in-person
semester, virtually, could be an influential cause of increased stress on minoritized students.
In order to obtain a more concrete understanding of this phenomenon, this study aimed to
answer the following research questions:
(1)
How many minoritized students chose to prioritize their mental health?
(2)
How do minoritized students describe their experiences and choices to prioritize
(or not) their mental health?
1.2. Literature Review
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of mental health for every-
one. One of the populations highly affected by the pandemic and its restrictions is college
students [
8
]. Numerous studies illustrate the challenges faced during the pandemic for both
teachers and students. Even before the pandemic, engineering undergraduate students
expressed a negative association between poor mental health and pursuing engineering [
9
].
There have been studies specifically regarding student mental health in higher education
during the pandemic. For instance, researchers at a large university in Texas conducted
semi-structured interviews to discover what coping skills students were using to address
their stress related to the pandemic. They revealed that students were coping not by seek-
ing support from mental-health professionals but by self-management and courting help
from family and friends [
8
]. Regardless of growing nationwide attention, undergradu-
ate engineering programs have minimal research and experience in addressing mental
health concerns [
10
]. A study to examine what methods kept STEM students actively
engaged in courses suggests that teachers of online courses drive student participation
instead of assuming that desired engagement will come from the students themselves [
11
].
Mental health is a potent forecaster of educational and workplace productivity [
12
];
if engineering departments aim to equip students to succeed, they must address and
support their mental health [12].
Research has described a stress culture in engineering, where undergraduate stu-
dents expect or deem high-stress levels and poor mental health necessary for success [
10
].
The relationship between high stress and poor mental health is quite upsetting, provided
the rate of stress increased for college students during the pandemic. Previous studies have
illustrated multiple stressors for college students, including family, romantic, peer, and
faculty relationships, lack of resources, expectations, academics, environment, diversity,
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 3 of 18
and transitions [
13
]. Despite acknowledging the existence of mental health, students do
not seek treatment due to lack of time, privacy, stigma, lack of emotional openness, and
financial constraints [
14
]. A similar study regarding the Headspace app illustrated that
stress and anxiety could negatively impact student experience, academic performance,
and retention [
1
]. That same study also observed that the mental health crisis is crucial in
engineering and students may correlate pursuing engineering with poor mental health.
A separate study supports that graduate students in STEM are at elevated risk for mental
health issues, particularly women [
1
,
3
]. These studies assert that a culture of stress has
consequential implications for the engineering ecosystem, and it is an obstacle for students
to not only join but also strive in engineering. One can infer that the additional stressors
of the pandemic can further aggravate these already existing mental health challenges.
Additional stressors may consist of issues with internet access, limited contact with peers,
the short amount of time to resolve issues, and the uncertainty of the duration of distance
learning [
15
]. Some of these stressors were disruptions to what was once readily accessible
to the student, such as changes to students’ living arrangements and the financial resources
available [
16
]. The lack of feeling connected to peers and mentors (due to social distancing
requirements) may contribute to a student’s hesitation to prioritize their mental health or
seek support to manage any challenges they may be facing.
Studies conducted by Chang et al. and Wang et al. focused on the impact COVID-19
had on college students at the graduate (both) and undergraduate (Wang et al.) levels.
The adaptations higher education had to undertake during the global pandemic are na-
tionally known in the U.S. These studies found that students had increased severity of
depression and anxiety as a result of living through the pandemic, and this was exacerbated
for students identifying as women, low-SES students, international students, and students
with disabilities [
17
,
18
]. This resulted in delaying graduation, having negative perceptions
of future job searches, and experiencing symptoms of depression and anxiety several days
a week on average [
17
,
18
]. It is important to note that while these studies explored the
impact of COVID-19 on the mental health of college students broadly, both fail to explore
this impact through an intersectional lens of race. Thus, this paper aims to add to this
discussion with the understanding that in the U.S., COVID-19 disproportionally impacted
people of color, and thus, the impact on their mental health is also of paramount focus.
Due to the lack of support for mental health both in the field of engineering and in communi-
ties of minoritized populations prior to COVID-19, as well as the clear exacerbation of these
stressors since the onset of the pandemic, this paper aims to discuss how these stressors have
impacted minoritized engineering students and the steps taken by students in response to these
stressors. Section 1.3 will highlight the theoretical framing used to develop the SenseMaker
platform that enabled us to capture perceptions of mental health during the pandemic.
1.3. SenseMaker Platform
We employed a mixed methods research tool called SenseMaker which “combines
first-hand narratives with the statistical authority of quantitative data” [
19
]. A signification
framework is built into the software by researchers in order to “guide the inquiry, solicit
micro-narratives, and clarify interpretations which extract associated meanings of the
narratives from participants” [
19
]. The sensemaking process takes place when participants
answer signifier questions relative to the narrative they shared. Answers to the signifiers
create numerical coordinates that are associated with the participant’s narrative and can be
compared to other participants within the platform. This allows for both qualitative and
quantitative data to be viewed and analyzed in parallel.
It is important that we make the distinction between SenseMaker analysis and nar-
rative analysis. Narrative inquiry focuses on the collection and analysis of stories to
understand an experience. While this is a strength of this methodological approach, it is
also its weakness for the research team, particularly for a large number of participants,
given the time it takes to collect, transcribe, and analyze data [
20
]. As narrative studies of
minoritized students increase in popularity as a way to explore the experiences of these
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 4 of 18
groups [
21
–
23
], the SenseMaker approach allows us to collect rich data akin to what we
could collect using narrative analysis and combine these narratives with detailed quan-
titative data, while also reaching a wide range of participants and avoiding the issue of
“small N” that is associated with these groups when using quantitative methods [24].
Theoretical Framework Used to Develop the SenseMaker Platform
Astin’s Theory of Student Involvement focuses on institutional outcomes in relation to
student development as a result of their level of involvement and engagement. There are
three components of focus: (1) student inputs (i.e., background, demographics, etc.), (2) the
student’s surroundings or environment (i.e., holistic set of experiences while in college), and
(3) student outcomes (i.e., who they are, what they believe once they leave the institution).
In addition to the three major components, Astin developed five (5) assumptions linked to
his theory of student involvement. First, there is mental and physical energy associated with
being and staying involved as a student. Second, the involvement is ongoing and will not
be the same for all students. Third, there are both quantitative and qualitative experiences
and components linked to students. Fourth, student outcomes from their involvement
are correlated with how much they were actually involved and how those experiences
were. Finally, the fifth assumption is that a student’s academic outcomes (i.e., persistence,
performance, etc.) are directly linked to their level of involvement and engagement at the
institution [
25
,
26
]. When referring to the three components of focus presented by Astin,
our study incorporates all three. Student inputs are in line with our focus on minoritized
students in engineering which covers their race/ethnic backgrounds and their academic
programs, which is key to this study. Secondly, the student’s environments were impacted
by COVID-19, and this study dives into how their environments were impacted. Third, this
study captures how students feel their academic outcomes will be impacted as a result of
COVID-19. Most importantly, and particularly, our study researches all three aspects with
mental health as a key focus.
To determine the signifiers for the SenseMaker survey, we researched and employed
the theory of thriving. Tobias [
27
] defines thriving as an attempt to “highlight the relation-
ship between organizational enlightenment (the thriving organization) and personal maturity
(the thriving person)” with the goal of strengthening organizational cultures. We chose this
framework specifically for Tobias’ definition of a thriving person: “a microcosm of the dilem-
mas, the tensions, the risks, and the opportunities inherent in ‘rearing’ a culture” (p. 4).
This idea of thriving draws parallels between thriving people and thriving organizations;
i.e., an organization cannot thrive if the people within it are not thriving. This framework
identifies the complexity involved in cultural development and highlights “areas that are
often neglected, especially by those who search for easy fixes and quick solutions” (p. 4).
According to Tobias, a thriving person is one who has initiative, discipline, and accountability,
invests in themself, is reflective and autonomous, and maintains a high regard for themself as
well as others. Appendix Aoutlines each of these characteristics as Tobias defines them.
Using the definitions outlined in Appendix Aand building on an existing survey also
developed in the SenseMaker platform [
28
,
29
], the survey questions were created to guide
inquiry and clarify interpretations of narratives provided by participants [
19
]. Given the
unusual circumstances brought by COVID-19, exploring what it means to be a thriving
person, or more specifically, a thriving student, is important to understand the role systems
(the universities) played in minoritized students’ ability to thrive during this time.
2. Materials and Methods
SenseMaker [
19
] is an online mixed methods data collection and analysis platform that
involves four iterative steps: (1) Initiation is the process of designing signifiers, testing, and
deploying the instrument; (2) Story Collection is the process of collecting data through narratives;
(3) Sensemaking is the process of exploring and analyzing patterns of the collection of narratives;
and (4) Response is the process of amplifying positive stories and dampening negative stories to
nudge the system towards an adjacent possible with the goal of improving the system.
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 5 of 18
2.1. Step 1: Initiation
This study builds upon a previously developed signification framework based on
the concept of thriving [
20
,
27
,
30
] and a similar study conducted at the University of
Georgia [
28
]. This framework included five triads, three dyads, and six to eight multiple-
choice questions outlined in Table 1.
Table 1. Five triads and three dyads that participants will use to self-signify their own stories.
Theoretical Grounding Question Triad
Autonomy My actions were motivated by . . . Expectations of others, self-care, necessity
Investment/discipline What was valued in this story was . . . Willingness to experiment, grit and
perseverance, planning and efficiency
Internal alignment/alignment
with others
The experience I shared influenced my
sense of . . . Confidence, purpose, belonging
Openness/reflectiveness Any decisions that were made in this story
were influenced by . . .
Intuition, self-reflection, feedback
from others
Flexibility Thinking about the future, this story
encourages me to . . .
Embrace risk, be willing to adapt, rely on
familiar ways of working
Thriving (overarching concept) +
accountability (sub-feature) Dyad: This story was about . . . Struggle–progress
Collaboration/competition,
selflessness/selfishness,
social contribution
Dyad: In this story I decided to prioritize . . . Myself/my own self-care–needs/expectations
of others
Support, rate of change Dyad: In this story, change is happening . . . Too slowly–too quickly
The research team, in collaboration with Cognitive Edge, developed these triads and
dyads by mapping the appropriate data collection points in SenseMaker to the concept
of thriving [
27
,
31
], modifying language and existing survey questions based on results
from previous studies [
20
,
28
], and adding additional questions in response to what was
most relevant to the experiences due to COVID-19. The goal of the project was to explore
the concept of thriving in minoritized engineering students nationwide and capture how
COVID-19 has impacted this population.
When developing the dyads and triads for the SenseMaker platform, it is important
that the options presented align with the prompt and create extremes given the context
of the spectrum. For example, in the triad in Figure 1, one could answer the question of
“My actions were motivated by” with a multiple-choice single-option response of necessity,
expectations of others, or self-care. Participants would then move the center hexagon
around the triad to indicate where they fall on the triad. However, the presentation
of prompts with responses in dyads or triads enables the participant to respond to the
prompts more holistically considering all factors involved in their response. Thus, from a
data analysis viewpoint, we can use dyads and triads to understand the extent to which
the options influenced the participant’s response to the corresponding prompt.
Educ.Sci.2023,13,xFORPEERREVIEW6of21
Figure1.SenseMakertriadthatprobestheconceptofautonomy.Thehexagoncanbemoved
withintheboundariesofthetriad.Ifthequestionisnotapplicabletotheparticipant,theycanse-
lectN/A.
2.2.Step2:ReflectiveNarrativeCollection
Narrative(i.e.,data)collectionentailedthedistributionofalinktoanonlinesurvey
thatposesthefollowingquestion:
“Imagineyouarechaingwithafriendorfamilymember.Tellthemaboutsomethingyou
haveexperiencedrecentlyasanengineeringstudentasaresultofCOVID-19.”
Aftersubmiingtheirnarrative,participantswereaskedaseriesofquestionsabout
theirstory,whichmaptothetriadsanddyadsinTable1,suchasthequestionshownin
Figure1.
Thisprocessisdefinedasself-significationandisoneofthemostuniqueandinno-
vativefeaturesofSenseMakerstudies.Asopposedtoresearchersanalyzingstories
throughtheirworldviews,participantsmakesenseoftheirownstoriesthroughthepro-
videdsignificationframework,thusreducingresearcherbias[19].
Whenpresentedwithatriad,participantswereaskedtomoveadotonthetriangle
tothepositionthatbestfitstheirstory.Intheanalysissoftware,eachdotrepresentsastory
thatcanbeexaminedfortrends.
2.3.Step3:Sensemaking“ExplorativePaernAnalysisandCollectiveSensemaking”
Datacollectedincludedparticipants’narratives(qualitative)andresponsestodyads,
triads,andmultiple-choicequestions(quantitativedata).Manyparticipantsengagedin
thestudyinJuneandJuly2020.
Asdatawerecollected,trendsofthedatawereanalyzedwiththegoalofdetecting
positivetrendsandweaksignalsthatemerged.Byidentifyingthesetrends,weareableto
communicatethewayinwhichfaculty,staff,andadministratorscanmakepositive
changesintheirrespectiverolesinorderto“amplifythepositiveanddampenthenega-
tive”withthegoalofcreating“morestorieslikethese,andfewerstorieslikethose”[19].
Byexaminingtriadanddyaddata(e.g.,dotsontriangles)aswellasXYplotsand
heatmaps,wewereabletodetermineanareaofimprovementinthesystem:self-
care/mentalhealth.InFigure2,thecircleintheupperrightcornerhighlightsthenumber
ofstoriesinwhichparticipantsindicatedprioritizingthemselvesandtheirmentalhealth
whilealsoexperiencingalotofstrugglesduringthistime.Throughthisresearch,wehope
toinspirechangesthatwouldshiftthesestoriestotheleftasindicatedbythearrowin
Figure2.
Figure 1.
SenseMaker triad that probes the concept of autonomy. The hexagon can be moved within
the boundaries of the triad. If the question is not applicable to the participant, they can select N/A.
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 6 of 18
2.2. Step 2: Reflective Narrative Collection
Narrative (i.e., data) collection entailed the distribution of a link to an online survey
that poses the following question:
“Imagine you are chatting with a friend or family member. Tell them about something you
have experienced recently as an engineering student as a result of COVID-19.”
After submitting their narrative, participants were asked a series of questions about
their story, which map to the triads and dyads in Table 1, such as the question shown in
Figure 1.
This process is defined as self-signification and is one of the most unique and innova-
tive features of SenseMaker studies. As opposed to researchers analyzing stories through
their worldviews, participants make sense of their own stories through the provided
signification framework, thus reducing researcher bias [19].
When presented with a triad, participants were asked to move a dot on the triangle to
the position that best fits their story. In the analysis software, each dot represents a story
that can be examined for trends.
2.3. Step 3: Sensemaking “Explorative Pattern Analysis and Collective Sensemaking”
Data collected included participants’ narratives (qualitative) and responses to dyads,
triads, and multiple-choice questions (quantitative data). Many participants engaged in the
study in June and July 2020.
As data were collected, trends of the data were analyzed with the goal of detecting
positive trends and weak signals that emerged. By identifying these trends, we are able to
communicate the way in which faculty, staff, and administrators can make positive changes
in their respective roles in order to “amplify the positive and dampen the negative” with the
goal of creating “more stories like these, and fewer stories like those” [
19
]. By examining
triad and dyad data (e.g., dots on triangles) as well as XY plots and heatmaps, we were able
to determine an area of improvement in the system: self-care/mental health. In Figure 2,
the circle in the upper right corner highlights the number of stories in which participants
indicated prioritizing themselves and their mental health while also experiencing a lot of
struggles during this time. Through this research, we hope to inspire changes that would
shift these stories to the left as indicated by the arrow in Figure 2.
Educ.Sci.2023,13,xFORPEERREVIEW7of21
Figure2.XYplotcreatedfromconstructsfromtwodyadsshownhereasaheatmap.Thesmall
dotsindicateparticipants.
Asindicatedbythecolorintensityoftheheatmap,whiletherearesomestoriesthat
prioritizedmentalhealthwithlilestruggle,therearenotnearlyasmanyofthosewho
indicatedhavingahighstruggleduringthistime.Itisalsoworthnotingtheweaksignals
intheboomcornersofFigure2.Weaksignalsareareasthatmaysignalopportunitiesfor
growthinthelongerterm.
Aseriesofchi-squaredtestsandone-wayANOVAswereconductedtoseeifthere
wasanystatisticalsignificanceinthedata.Toconducttheone-wayANOVAs,thedyadof
“PrioritizingMyselfvs.PrioritizingtheNeeds/ExpectationsofOthers”wasmaintainedas
acontinuousdependentvariableandevaluatedforcorrelationsforthefollowinginde-
pendentvariables:(1)feelingsaboutexperience;(2)yearinschool;(3)genderidentity;(4)
racialidentity;(5)familyincome;and(6)major.ANOVAtestswerealsoconductedatthe
intersectionofraceandgender.Toconductthechi-squaredtests,theaveragevaluefor
participants’responseswasusedasathreshold.Ifaparticipant’sresponsewasgreater
thantheaverage,theywerelabeledas“PrioritizedSelf-Care/MentalHealth”.Ifapartici-
pant’sresponsewaslowerthantheaverage,theywerelabeledas“DidNotPrioritizeSelf-
Care/MentalHealth”.
Participantnarrativeswereanalyzedusingfirst-levelandpaerncodingmethods
developedbyMilesetal.[31].First-levelcodingwasusedforsummarizingsegmentsof
databasedonfourkeywordsrelatingtomentalhealth:mentalhealth,depression/de-
pressed,anxiety/anxious,andstress(ed).Oncefirst-levelcodingwascompleted,paern
codingwasconductedtoidentifythemesrelatingtothementalhealthofparticipantsdur-
ingthepandemic.
2.4.Step4:Response“AmplifythePositiveandDampentheNegativetoNudgetheSystemtoan
AdjacentPossible”
Throughcontinueddataanalysis,wehavethetoolstocommunicatetoinstitutions,
students,andthebroadercommunitytheimpactsCOVID-19hashadonminoritizeden-
gineeringstudents.Thereareseveralimportantthemesthatemergedfromthesedata.For
thispaper,wearefocusingspecificallyonthethemeofself-care/mentalhealthgiventhat,
duringatimewhenmanyaresuggestingthatwetakespecialcareofmentalwell-being,
minoritizedstudentshavenotdonesoforavarietyofreasons.Inthispaper,weaimto
highlighttheexperiencesofminoritizedstudents’prioritizationofmentalhealthduring
thisdifficulttime.
2.5.ValidityandReliability
Traditionally,thevalidityandreliabilityofastudy,particularlyastheypertainto
mixedmethodsapproaches,arebasedonthetriangulationofmeasures.Insurveys,this
Figure 2.
XY plot created from constructs from two dyads shown here as a heatmap. The small dots
indicate participants.
As indicated by the color intensity of the heatmap, while there are some stories that
prioritized mental health with little struggle, there are not nearly as many of those who
indicated having a high struggle during this time. It is also worth noting the weak signals
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 7 of 18
in the bottom corners of Figure 2. Weak signals are areas that may signal opportunities for
growth in the longer term.
A series of chi-squared tests and one-way ANOVAs were conducted to see if there
was any statistical significance in the data. To conduct the one-way ANOVAs, the dyad of
“Prioritizing Myself vs. Prioritizing the Needs/Expectations of Others” was maintained
as a continuous dependent variable and evaluated for correlations for the following in-
dependent variables: (1) feelings about experience; (2) year in school; (3) gender identity;
(4) racial identity; (5) family income; and (6) major. ANOVA tests were also conducted at
the intersection of race and gender. To conduct the chi-squared tests, the average value
for participants’ responses was used as a threshold. If a participant’s response was greater
than the average, they were labeled as “Prioritized Self-Care/Mental Health”. If a par-
ticipant’s response was lower than the average, they were labeled as “Did Not Prioritize
Self-Care/Mental Health”.
Participant narratives were analyzed using first-level and pattern coding methods de-
veloped by Miles et al. [
31
]. First-level coding was used for summarizing segments of data
based on four keywords relating to mental health: mental health, depression/depressed,
anxiety/anxious, and stress(ed). Once first-level coding was completed, pattern coding was
conducted to identify themes relating to the mental health of participants during the pandemic.
2.4. Step 4: Response “Amplify the Positive and Dampen the Negative to Nudge the System
to an Adjacent Possible”
Through continued data analysis, we have the tools to communicate to institutions,
students, and the broader community the impacts COVID-19 has had on minoritized
engineering students. There are several important themes that emerged from these data.
For this paper, we are focusing specifically on the theme of self-care/mental health given
that, during a time when many are suggesting that we take special care of mental well-
being, minoritized students have not done so for a variety of reasons. In this paper, we aim
to highlight the experiences of minoritized students’ prioritization of mental health during
this difficult time.
2.5. Validity and Reliability
Traditionally, the validity and reliability of a study, particularly as they pertain to
mixed methods approaches, are based on the triangulation of measures. In surveys, this
can include both open and closed-ended questions to measure the construct of interest [
32
].
Given the single prompt (open-ended question), it is important that when using the Sense-
Maker platform, each of the options on the triads and dyads (closed-ended questions) work
together to maintain construct validity [33].
Another validation method is member checking which is defined as taking cleaned data
and interpretations back to participants to confirm that an accurate account of the narrative was
conducted [
33
]. According to Guba and Lincoln [
34
], member checking is the most important
method of establishing credibility within a study. This process takes place in Step 3 (Section 2.3)
which is the collective sensemaking process. Because of the anonymity of the survey, collective
sensemaking may not include original survey participants but can include people who identify
with survey participants (race, gender, year in school, etc.).
The reliability of a study is indicative of how consistent the instrument is in measuring
constructs [
35
]. As mentioned previously, the SenseMaker survey was distributed was modified
and enhanced based on a similar pilot survey distributed locally [
20
,
28
]. Modifications to the
survey were conducted in collaboration with a Cognitive Edge team member (who also helped
develop the pilot survey) and were performed to capture more accurate responses relevant to
the pandemic.
2.6. Recruitment
There were 500 students (undergraduate and graduate) who participated in this study.
Participants were required to be enrolled at a 4-year degree-granting institution and self-
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 8 of 18
identify as a minoritized student. Social media, personal connections, and listservs for
the National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE) and the Society of Hispanic Professional
Engineers (SHPE) were used in our recruitment methods. Participants received a USD 10
electronic Amazon gift card as a thank-you for their participation. Given the demographics
of our participants, the research team opted not to include a “control group”. Due to the
sensitivity of the COVID-19 pandemic and the marginalization experienced by minoritized
engineering students (prior to and ongoing since the pandemic), our goal is to not present
a struggle Olympics amongst participants but simply present and center the experiences
of our participants as they are valid without the need to be compared to a majority or
“control” group.
3. Results
As previously mentioned, SenseMaker is a unique mixed methods tool that collects
both qualitative and quantitative data from each participant. In this section, we will
discuss how these methodologies work together to provide a better understanding of how
minoritized engineering students prioritized their mental health.
3.1. Quantitative Findings
RQ1: How Many Minoritized Students Chose to Prioritize Their Mental Health?
Of the total number of stories shared, ~46% of participants indicated that they pri-
oritized their mental health versus ~54% of participants who indicated prioritizing the
needs of others. Appendix Bdetails how we aggregated the data by overall experience
(Table A2), year in school (Table A3), gender identity (Table A4), racial identity (Table A5),
family income (Table A6), and major (Table A7).
Using a confidence interval of 95%, the results for each of the chi-squared tests that
were conducted indicated that there were no statistical differences in the data. Addition-
ally, the results for each of the one-way ANOVAs that were conducted also indicated no
statistical significance in the data. While there were no statistical significances present
when comparing the prioritization of self-care/mental health to the various independent
variables, we recognize that people are more than just numbers and their experiences
should not be minimized to the results of statistical tests. Therefore, in Section 3.2, we
present the findings of our qualitative data collection.
3.2. Qualitative Findings
Using the four keywords relating to mental health, mental health, depression/depressed,
anxiety/anxious, and stress(ed), eight major themes emerged from the data outlined in Table 2.
Table 2. Emergent themes related to mental health as experienced by participants.
Theme Definition: Participants Expressed . . .
Depression, Anxiety,
and Stress
. . . experiencing increased depression, anxiety, and/or stress due to
the pandemic.
Isolation . . . experiencing increased loneliness and reduced access to
community support.
Overwhelmed . . . being overwhelmed by the rapid shift and increased responsibilities.
Home Life Struggles . . . difficulty working/focusing at home, increased domestic
responsibilities, and disputes with family.
Motivation . . . experiencing reduced motivation to complete tasks.
Lack of Empathy . . . experiencing a lack of care and support from instructors.
Coping . . . finding things to help them escape their reality.
Support . . . experiencing support amidst the challenges of the pandemic.
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 9 of 18
Due to the permissions participants allowed for readers to view their narratives
(everyone vs. researchers only), many specific examples that resulted in the emergent
themes are unable to be shared in this paper. However, the narratives that are permissible
for public viewership will be shared as participant profiles. Additionally, results are
presented as profiles to demonstrate the depth of participants’ experiences versus merely
examples of emergent themes.
RQ2: How Do Minoritized Students Describe Their Experiences and Choices to Prioritize
(or Not Prioritize) Their Mental Health?
Participant 1 Profile: Hispanic/Latino Cis-Woman, Engineering Education Graduate Student,
Extremely Positive Feelings, Prioritized Mental Health/Self-Care
Story Title: Sow mental health, harvest healthy work environments.
Before COVID-19 hit, I had just joined a different lab group. I had met all the members
already and was participating in bi-weekly meetings with them. After COVID-19, the
professor leading the group changed all our meetings to weekly optional check-ins. I was
really surprised by it since I’d heard from other students that their advisors were giving
them loads of work since they were home all the time now. Instead, my new advisor
focused greatly on mental health and encouraged us to talk to each other when needed and
to be open about our worries. He himself was very open with us and that helped us see
that everyone is going through the same thing together. After each check-in, we decided
how much work we were able to do for the week. He said we were better at assessing our
own progress and capabilities than he was. I really appreciated that. Even when we didn’t
have a meeting scheduled, some of the lab members would tune in to the lab channel and
keep each other company while working. Our advisor brought us together and gave us a
space to be open about our concerns.
Participant 2 Profile: White Cis-Woman, Civil Engineering Junior, Positive Feelings, Prioritized
Mental Health/Self-Care
Story Title: Finally Able to Breathe.
This experience has truly allowed me to take time to focus on my mental health and dwell
on my options for my future after graduation, and this is something I have never really
been able to think about before. I think the college environment, especially for engineers,
can become excessively competitive and numbing. It is easy to lose sight of why you
pursued your respective degree in the first place because you become so focused on getting
a good GPA, staying active in clubs and organizations, balancing a social life, keeping
physically active, etc. This was especially true right before classes were switched to online
right after winter break. It was the middle of my second semester of junior year, and I
wasn’t able to reflect on my passions, experiences, and future because I was drowning in
engineering coursework, extracurriculars, and work. However, once online classes started,
I had more time to breathe and reflect. I wouldn’t say I have a better focus than I did before
everything started, but I was able to really appreciate my classes and realize that, at this
point in my college career, I am learning things I will directly apply in my engineering
career. I have also found a greater appreciation for my peers, professors, advisors, and the
academic community as a whole. I have found my motivation and energy again, and I
think from now on I will be comfortable in taking time to reflect and assess.
As demonstrated by these participants’ narratives, there were minoritized students who
experienced
Support
amidst the challenges of the pandemic.
Participants 1 and 2
had positive
experiences during the pandemic and were able to prioritize their mental health largely due to
the
Support
they received and shared through their narratives. While Participant 1 focused
primarily on the
Support
they received from their graduate advisor, Participant 2 shared
that their
Support
came from a variety of places such as peers, professors, and academic
advisors. There were participants who indicated having extremely positive or positive
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 10 of 18
feelings about their experiences and indicated that they did not prioritize their mental
health but made no mention of the subject in their narratives.
While many participants who had positive experiences indicated a strong priority
of their mental health, that was not the case for participants who had less than positive
experiences (Participants 3, 4, and 5).
Participant 3 Profile: Black/African American Cis-Woman, Chemical Engineering Senior,
Neutral Feelings, Did Not Prioritize Mental Health/Self-Care
Story Title: Impacts of COVID from academia to personal life.
As schools were closing down around us, it took [HBCU] days to figure out if we were
going to go home or stay on campus. It was late Thursday when they decided that they
were going to shut down for‚ “two weeks” and informing students on campus that they
had two days to get off campus. I witnessed friends scurry to get plane tickets or figure
out where they were going to stay before traveling home because finances did not allow
them to travel home within 48 hrs. Professors and students had to transition rapidly to
online learning. As an engineering student that is accustomed to being in a classroom
or studying in the engineering lounge, it was difficult. First two weeks, I lost track
of assignments due. Additionally, Professors in my humanities courses were adding
on assignments because they thought we had the time. As a graduating senior, I had
an extensive senior design project that needed more attention. I had to take my time
management seriously by utilizing a chalk and dry erase board to write down assignments
due. At the same time, my family and friends in New Jersey and New York were impacted
by COVID the most. Hearing what they were going through and see how it was impacting
them took a toll on my mental and emotional health. After the semester was over [HBCU]
continued to show a lack of support towards their students as well as their professors.
Recently, they gave students two weeks to head to the institution to pack up their dorms.
Imagine students for the Midwest to the West Coast having a short amount of time
to buy plane tickets to pack up their dorm. Some tickets were expensive. When the
students and parents complained, they were told to “hire a private moving company”.
That is not a response that they should hear. Especially, when most students are going
through a lot during the pandemic and might not have the finances. Additionally, being a
graduate I was looking forward to starting my career as a chemical engineer at [company].
COVID has hindered my start date. I am a co-homeowner and have bills to pay and need
to start working to not fall behind. The stimulus check provided was enough to cover 1
month and a half worth of bills. Nonetheless, being home has been a real struggle because
I am used to working whether it is at a job or on assignments for school.
Participant 4 Profile: Black/African American Cis-Woman, Computer Science Junior, Negative
Feelings, Prioritized Mental Health/Self-Care
Story Title: Overcoming Hard times or Not.
During the COVID-19 crisis, I experienced an overwhelming increase in anxiety.
Right before quarantine started, I was already experiencing a lot of anxiety attacks
and my mental health was going in the opposite direction of being healthy. This caused
me to take a trip to the hospital which was ordered by my school counselor. I wasn’t
fully recovered or at least good enough for something like this to happen to me. Once I
realized that everything was closing and I had no outlet or get away from my problems,
things went left. I have never felt so confined to just my apartment and making store trips
which wasn’t doing much for me. It started to affect my work on top of some teachers
not being able to transition as easily as other because of their own problems at home.
This had to literally be the worst time of my life. I was forced to be by myself, especially if
I wanted to stay healthy. I spent everyday doing homework and studying just thinking,
I can’t wait until it’s the summer and school is over but even that overwhelmed me.
Once the summertime came, then what? I had no idea how this virus was going to turn
out. It caused me to just get by in school. I wasn’t focused one bit because everyday was
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 11 of 18
a challenge. Luckily to say that I did finish with some pretty good grades, but it took
everything I had in me. I’ve never pushed so hard in my life and I have been through and
got through a lot. Still today, I am dealing with some anxiety but at least I don’t have
school to add to it. The only thing I can do is receive support from understanding people
and continue to take care of myself.
Participant 5 Profile: Black/African American Cis-Man, Chemical Engineering Senior,
Extremely Negative Feelings, Did Not Prioritize Mental Health/Self-Care
Story Title: The Pandemic of Ignorance.
Being an engineering student during the COVID-19 crisis was extremely stressful and
tiring. At my school, we were required to attend double the amount of lectures in addition
to the live lectures. This was inconvenient for me because something I think the professors
still fail to understand is that even though we are at home, we do not have more time.
As time progressed, the pre-recorded lectures got worse as professors completely skipped
examples and just told us to work on them ourselves. This completely defeated the purpose
of having a pre-recorded lecture if we weren’t doing problems. Additionally, we were
assigned a ridiculous amount of work in the courses. Students were barely given any
extra time to submit assignments and had to deal with the stress of penalties from the
professor if anything was submitted a minute late. The submission portals disappeared at
the exact time they were due (ex. 10:30:00) so if you attempted to submit even a second
later, it was gone. There was no consideration for technical difficulties and it required me
to rush to submit my assignments rather than check my work. When I tried to respectfully
tell professors the issues that I experienced, they tended to defend themselves and disagree
with my experiences. I believe it is important as students for our opinions to be taken into
consideration and not brushed aside. Since we have been home, the professors have not
been considerate of the overlapping schedules of our other chemical engineering courses.
If we were in person, most professors would try to make sure our assignments and exams
don’t overlap but now it seems as if they do not care. I would have multiple weeks where
I had three exams, multiple quizzes, and multiple homework assignments. This was
just in the chemical engineering courses. Students have family responsibilities, research
responsibilities, and clubs and organizations that they are a part of that continue to
meet throughout the quarantine. It is very disturbing and disheartening to see how our
professors have handled some of our concerns in these courses. I know that this is not
an ideal situation for anyone to be in, but I find it hard to even prioritize my physical
and mental wellbeing because my life is completely consumed by schoolwork. For many
students, we are trapped inside our rooms. Although the junior year curriculum is known
as the worst year of the chemical engineering major, I feel as if the professors can be
more accommodating to student‚ concerns. Since I have been a part of the department at
my school, the difficulties and hardships that students face are treated more as a rite of
passage than serious issues that faculty try to mitigate. This major is already difficult
enough and especially when you feel as if you do not have people to advocate for you in
the major or a strong support system within the department, this can make it that much
harder. Additionally, I thought that the P/F option was extremely necessary as we are in
a global pandemic. It seems absurd that instead of focusing on our physical and mental
wellbeing, our peace is being disturbed at home and we are forced to wonder if we will or
will not pass our courses. I fully understand believing that students should progress to
the next course after mastery of the material but penalizing students for situations that
are out of their control and forcing them to stay an extra year at school is extremely unfair
and inconsiderate. It is impossible to imagine the different scenarios that every student
is facing and what their home life is like. Many students are currently housing insecure,
food insecure, and without income due to school closures. In addition, there are students
taking care of children or elderly folks, students without internet access, students living in
abusive households, and students with disabilities without access to accommodations. Finally,
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 12 of 18
some students will inevitably become ill with COVID-19. It is unreasonable to maintain the
expectation that students uphold their grades while grappling with these difficulties.
For participants who indicated having less than positive experiences, prioritization
of mental health varied in no particular order. Participant 3’s narrative is an example of a
student who was Overwhelmed during the pandemic and experienced a Lack of Empathy,
Depression, Anxiety, and Stress, and Home Life Struggles during the pandemic. Some of
the stories were like Participant 4’s in which having a negative experience prompted them
to focus more on their own well-being versus meeting the needs or expectations of others,
but they still experienced Depression, Anxiety, and Stress, Isolation, and Support during the
pandemic. Other stories were like Participant 5’s in which having a negative experience is
exactly the reason why they found it difficult to prioritize their mental health. The pressure
to manage responsibilities during this unprecedented time (and some somewhat urgently)
further exacerbated the de-prioritization of mental health and self-care and is another
example of those who were Overwhelmed and experienced a Lack of Empathy, Isolation,
and Home Life Struggles.
4. Discussion
Minoritized students are not a monolith [
36
–
39
]. Of the students who did not priori-
tize their mental health, some had bad experiences while others had positive experiences.
Both can serve as examples for institutional leaders who are working to make improve-
ments. When connecting the findings back to Aston’s Theory of Student Involvement,
the qualitative and quantitative results clearly highlight the impact COVID-19 has had
on minoritized students in engineering. Most evidently, their environments were impacted
by being uprooted from traditional classrooms and losing direct contact with faculty mem-
bers, classmates, and other hands-on support systems [
40
]. Studies have found that the
correlation between mental health, belonging, and persistence in engineering is very strong.
Individuals will disengage from situations where they feel a threat to their abilities based on
negative stereotypes and experiences [
41
]. Within this study, students elaborated on their long-
term concerns for their grades and the stress it has caused, and research continues to highlight
these challenges and how they can be addressed. It is also worth noting that some concerns
expressed by participants, such as a lack of empathy for minoritized student experiences, were
present prior to COVID-19, and the pandemic further exacerbated these issues [42–50].
At the classroom level, several institutions are incorporating reflection periods that are
similar to the journaling process. Recent studies are showing that these types of activities
promote community and show students that faculty care about mental health and how it
affects students’ academic success [
51
]. Students are able to anonymously place symbols
that represent their feelings, allowing for both the professor and student peers to obtain an
understanding of where everyone was emotionally. This type of communication and rapport is
needed, especially within virtual settings, and also to bridge the gap between diverse students
who are dealing with diverse challenges during this time and who would otherwise not relate
to one another [
51
]. At the University of California at Davis, an elective seminar was offered to
support students and resulted in positive feedback including feeling appreciated, in general,
and thankful for the advice around time-management topics, self-care, and wellness [16].
Within this discussion, we have focused on solutions given the importance of this
topic and extensive literature around how concerns arise related to self-care and mental
health for all college students. Administrators and leaders at the various levels of higher
education will benefit from investing time and resources into better understanding students
and their self-care, especially when it comes to mental health. Overall, future research will
need to explore and understand the short-to-long-term implications of COVID-19 for this
population, especially as uncertainty around the pandemic continues.
Limitations
While an extensive amount of quality student responses was collected for this project,
it did not come without limitations. When considering that the target population focused
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 13 of 18
on minoritized students, a higher number of Native American and other minority students
would have been ideal. When considering the national engineering enrollment rates, our
findings did have an imbalance of representation across the groups. A higher representation
of students from Tribal Colleges and community colleges would have added additional
insight to our findings. Given the state of the pandemic and various data collection methods
that have been disbursed to students, survey fatigue is acknowledged. This goes along
with the timing of the survey. Most students are not on campus and, therefore, are not
checking their email accounts as often, thus decreasing the number of survey respondents.
Another limitation of this project was not implementing specific components of the
SenseMaker tool. Ideally, data collection is an ongoing, iterative process in which re-
searchers continuously gain feedback from participants as they work to gradually shift
narratives in a positive direction [
19
]. However, we have learned that it is difficult to
implement Step 4, the process of using responses to amplify the positive and dampen the
negative in a continuous feedback loop, of the sensemaking process with a nationwide
data pool. This is not due to the size of our dataset but rather the level of direct influence
we have over changing the specific experiences of those who participated in the study.
While we are attempting to mimic this process through public webinars and seminars,
we are unable to control for whether the information we are disseminating based on our
findings is actually being used to make positive shifts in the narratives.
5. Conclusions
The COVID-19 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on higher education insti-
tutions. The well-being of students from historically minoritized groups within engineering
education was of great concern due to the challenges they faced even before the pandemic.
Unique findings around self-care and mental health from initial analysis led to a focus
on this phenomenon, given the heightened focus on the subject during this time. A key
finding was that, even within the minoritized engineering population, student respon-
dent decisions to prioritize their mental health were not monolithic. There were students
who had positive experiences during this time which resulted in a strong prioritization of
self-care, while others had negative experiences which resulted in a varied prioritization
of self-care. Several students chose to prioritize their mental health as a way to remain
mentally and emotionally afloat during this time. For others, their negative experiences
resulted in them abandoning self-care strategies in order to tend to the needs of academics
or family members. When it comes to this engineering student population, the types of
sociological capital are dynamic in how they interact with one another. Overall, the topics
of self-care and mental health for engineering students should be prioritized by higher
education leaders, especially during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.
Author Contributions:
Conceptualization, R.S.L., T.F. and Z.V.S.; methodology, R.S.L. and Z.V.S.;
software, R.S.L., D.A. and Z.V.S.; validation, R.S.L. and T.F.; formal analysis, R.S.L. and Z.V.S.; investi-
gation, R.S.L. and T.F.; resources, R.S.L.; data curation, R.S.L.; writing—original draft preparation,
R.S.L., T.F. and D.A.; writing—review and editing, R.S.L., A.P. and Z.V.S.; visualization, R.S.L.;
supervision, R.S.L.; project administration, R.S.L.; funding acquisition, R.S.L. and T.F. All authors
have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Science Foundation grant number 2029564.
Institutional Review Board Statement:
The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration
of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board (or Ethics Committee) of the University
of Georgia (protocol code PROJECT00002167 and 16 April 2020).
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments:
We would like to acknowledge the support of Nicki Sochacka for introducing
Sensemaker to the research team.
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 14 of 18
Conflicts of Interest:
The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses,
or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.
Appendix A Definitions of a Thriving Person
Table A1. Definitions of the thriving person (Tobias, 2004, Appendix).
Concept Definition
Initiative
Is initiative-taking, proactive, industrious, goal-oriented, decisive, impactful, purposeful,
forward-moving; confronts obstacles; is ready to respond; does not exhibit withdrawal, fatalism,
or helpless resignation in the face of barriers
Discipline
Is disciplined, persistent, effortful, planful, reliable; orders life and priorities; constructively uses
systems, structures, schedules, and methods to foster accomplishment; exercises self-control;
meets or fulfills obligations and commitments; stays within appropriate boundaries; stays
focused and appropriately on track without undue distractions or impulsiveness; avoids the easy
way out if that diminishes effectiveness; is efficient in use of time and resources
Accountability
Holds self widely accountable; maintains high standards and a continuous growing edge; is
self-demanding; takes responsibility for self-improvement; measures own progress; acknowledges
failures and is not content with excuses; accepts both credit and blame; constructively compares self
with others and faces up to criticisms and weaknesses; does not just wait for issues to surface but
attempts to anticipate the unspecifiable and to prepare for adversity or opportunity
Investment
Invests in self; prepares for the future; delays the gratification of short-term goals in the service of
long-term goals; balances priorities and goals to optimize eventual effectiveness; husbands
resources; maintains reserves; ministers to self; builds on native assets; avoids squandering
resources, talents, time, or energy because of shortsightedness, greed, or lack of perspective
Openness/Reflectiveness
Is open to ideas, feelings, feedback, experience; is inquiring, progressive, receptive to divergent
perspectives; is skilled in resolving differences of viewpoint; is not dogmatic; willingly questions
tradition and the status quo; is tolerant of ambiguity, inconsistencies, contradictions; is open to
humor; is self-scrutinizing, reflective, willing to face up to issues, willing to acknowledge faults or
failures; seeks out own prejudices and biases; invites diverse input; is willing to test conventional
reality; searches for own biases and blind spots; is receptive to constructive criticism; is sensitive
to feelings, empathic; has a good sense of own strengths and shortcomings; searches for
discrepancies between ideals and actions
Flexibility
Is flexible; seeks personal growth; adapts to new environments, challenges, crises, internal
conflicts, changes; is resourceful; is able to change course; does not over persist or get stuck in
blind alleys; tries new ways around resistant obstacles; is willing to risk and to try new things;
embraces change; welcomes novelty; is able to change own mind
Autonomy
Is autonomous, weaned, independent, self-reliant; thinks for self; has courage of convictions; has
clear sense of self-identity, self-direction, internal rudder; can handle rejection; can go against the
flow when appropriate; appropriately conforms, but is not conformist; is willing and able to make
own choices and decisions; is able to assert own needs and priorities; can find own structure
amidst unclear pathways
Alignment with Others
Is interrelated, aligned with others; exhibits social consciousness; feels ownership/responsibility
for the welfare of an increasingly widening circle of others; reaches out to others; is able to join
and fit in; is able to contribute as a member of a team; is tolerant, accepting, responsive, affirming,
approachable, communicative, capable of intimacy and trust; has com-passionate regard for
others; is capable of forgiveness; has a sense of intergenerational reciprocity; respects personal
boundaries; attempts to work out differences and reach compromises; has brotherly/sisterly
feelings toward peers and parental feelings toward the community; builds willing constituencies
of mentors, peers, and followers
Internal Alignment
Is internally aligned, personally integrated, genuine, authentic, transparent; has a well-developed
and well-articulated self-concept and value system that are consistent with feelings and behavior;
stands for something; has a unifying philosophy and sense of purpose/mission; has vitality,
zest/appreciation for life; has integrity and an ethical sense; is self-aware, insightful; is able to
resolve internal conflicts; has humility and self-esteem; is realistic, objective, able to adopt a
balanced perspective; exhibits a minimum of hypocrisy
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 15 of 18
Appendix B Quantitative Data Tables
Table A2.
The number of students who did or did not prioritize self-care/mental health according to
how they felt about their experience.
How Do You Feel about Your Experience? Did Prioritize (C) (R) Did Not Prioritize (C) (R) Total
(1) Extremely Positive 16 (6.9%) (53.3%) 14 (5.2%) (46.7%) 30
(2) Positive 58 (25%) (57.4%) 43 (16%) (42.6%) 101
(3) Neutral 46 (19.8%) (38.7%) 73 (27.2%) (61.3%) 119
(4) Negative 93 (40.1%) (48.2%) 100 (37.3%) (51.8%) 193
(5) Extremely Negative 19 (8.2%) (37.3%) 32 (11.9%) (62.7%) 51
(6) Prefer not to answer 6 (2.2%) (100%) 6
Grand Total 232 268 500
Table A3.
Number of students who did or did not prioritize self-care/mental health by year in school.
Year in School Did Prioritize (C) (R) Did Not Prioritize (C) (R) Total
(1) Freshman 49 (21.1%) (51%) 47 (17.5%) (49%) 96
(2) Sophomore 43 (18.5%) (44.8%) 53 (19.8%) (55.2%) 96
(3) Junior 61 (26.3%) (45.5%) 73 (27.2%) (54.5%) 134
(4) Senior 50 (21.6%) (45.9%) 59 (22%) (54.1%) 109
(5) Graduate Student 27 (11.6%) (49.1%) 28 (10.4%) (50.9%) 55
(6) Prefer not to answer 2 (0.9%) (20%) 8 (3%) (80%) 10
Grand Total 232 268 500
Table A4.
Number of students who did or did not prioritize self-care/mental health by gender identity.
Gender Identity Did Prioritize (C) (R) Did Not Prioritize (C) (R) Total
Cis-Man 89 (38.4%) (53.3%) 78 (29.1%) (46.7%) 167
Cis-Woman 124 (53.4%) (42.2%) 170 (63.4%) (57.8%) 294
Non-Binary/Non-Conforming 2 (0.9%) (66.7%) 1 (0.4%) (33.3%) 3
Other gender expression 4 (1.7%) (33.3%) 8 (3%) (66.7%) 12
Prefer not to answer 13 (5.6%) (56.5%) 10 (3.7%) (43.5%) 23
Transgender Man (0%) (0%) 1 (0.4%) (100%) 1
Grand Total 232 268 500
Table A5.
Number of students who did or did not prioritize self-care/mental health by racial identity.
Racial Identity Did Prioritize (C) (R) Did Not Prioritize (C) (R) Total
American Indian/Alaskan Native 1 (0.4%) (100%) (0%) (0%) 1
Asian 23 (9.9%) (44.2%) 29 (10.8%) (55.8%) 52
Black/African American 112 (48.3%) (49.6%) 114 (42.5%) (50.4%) 226
Hispanic/Latino 16 (6.9%) (48.5%) 17 (6.3%) (51.5%) 33
Mixed Race 23 (9.9%) (46.9%) 26 (9.7%) (53.1%) 49
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 1 (0.4%) (100%) (0%) (0%) 1
Other (0%) (0%) 1 (0.4%) (100%) 1
Prefer not to answer 2 (0.9%) (28.6%) 5 (1.9%) (71.4%) 7
White 54 (23.3%) (41.5%) 76 (28.4%) (58.5%) 130
Grand Total 232 268 500
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 16 of 18
Table A6. Number of students who did or did not prioritize self-care/mental health by family income.
2019 Family Income Did Prioritize (C) (R) Did Not Prioritize (C) (R) Total
(1) Less than USD 25,000 28 (12.1%) (48.3%) 30 (11.2%) (51.7%) 58
(2) USD 25,000–USD 50,000 48 (20.7%) (52.2%) 44 (16.4%) (47.8%) 92
(3) USD 50,000–USD 100,000 54 (23.3%) (46.2%) 63 (23.5%) (53.8%) 117
(4) USD 100,000–USD 200,000 43 (18.5%) (40.2%) 64 (23.9%) (59.8%) 107
(5) More than USD 200,000 11 (4.7%) (31.4%) 24 (9%) (68.6%) 35
(6) Prefer not to answer 48 (20.7%) (52.7%) 43 (16%) (47.3%) 91
Grand Total 232 268 500
Table A7. Number of students who did or did not prioritize self-care/mental health by major.
Major Did Prioritize (C) (R) Did Not Prioritize (C) (R) Total
Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering 3 (1.3%) (50%) 3 (1.1%) (50%) 6
Aerospace Engineering 11 (4.7%) (47.8%) 12 (4.5%) (52.2%) 23
Biomedical/Biochemical Engineering 19 (8.2%) (33.3%) 38 (14.2%) (66.7%) 57
Chemical Engineering 17 (7.3%) (39.5%) 26 (9.7%) (60.5%) 43
Civil Engineering 24 (10.3%) (43.6%) 31 (11.6%) (56.4%) 55
Computer Science 44 (19%) (61.1%) 28 (10.4%) (38.9%) 72
Construction Engineering and Management 3 (1.3%) (75%) 1 (0.4%) (25%) 4
Electrical and Computer Engineering 24 (10.3%) (47.1%) 27 (10.1%) (52.9%) 51
Engineering Education 2 (0.9%) (66.7%) 1 (0.4%) (33.3%) 3
Engineering Science and Mechanics (0%) (0%) 1 (0.4%) (100%) 1
Engineering Technology 2 (0.9%) (40%) 3 (1.1%) (60%) 5
Environmental Engineering 3 (1.3%) (50%) 3 (1.1%) (50%) 6
Food, Agricultural, and Biological Engineering
2 (0.9%) (33.3%) 4 (1.5%) (66.7%) 6
Industrial and Systems Engineering 20 (8.6%) (48.8%) 21 (7.8%) (51.2%) 41
Materials Science and Engineering 7 (3%) (53.8%) 6 (2.2%) (46.2%) 13
Mechanical Engineering 43 (18.5%) (50%) 43 (16%) (50%) 86
Mining and Materials Engineering 1 (0.4%) (20%) 4 (1.5%) (80%) 5
Ocean Engineering (0%) (0%) 2 (0.7%) (100%) 2
Other 6 (2.6%) (30%) 14 (5.2%) (70%) 20
Welding Engineering 1 (0.4%) (100%) (0%) (0%) 1
Grand Total 232 268 500
References
1.
Miller, I.; Jensen, K.J. Introduction of Mindfulness in an Online Engineering Core Course during the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Adv. Eng. Educ. 2020,8, 1–7.
2. Friga, P.N. Under Covid-19, University Budgets like We’ve Never Seen Before. Chron. High. Educ. 2020, 1–13.
3.
Arnold, A.C.; Wilkins-Yel, K.G.; Bekki, J.M.; Bernstein, B.L.; Natarajan, M.; Randall, A.K.; Francies, R.; Okwu, C.E. Examining the
Effects of STEM Climate on the Mental Health of Graduate Women from Diverse Racial/Ethnic Backgrounds. In Proceedings of
the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition 2020, Virtual Conference, 22–26 June 2020.
4.
Smith, K.; Bhui, K.; Cipriani, A. COVID-19, Mental Health and Ethnic Minorities. Evid. Based Ment. Health
2020
,23, 89–90.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
5.
Bono, G.; Reil, K.; Hescox, J. Stress and Wellbeing in Urban College Students in the U.S. during the Covid-19 Pandemic: Can Grit
and Gratitude Help? Int. J. Wellbeing 2020,10, 39–57. [CrossRef]
6.
Hoyt, L.T.; Cohen, A.K.; Dull, B.; Maker Castro, E.; Yazdani, N. “Constant Stress Has Become the New Normal”: Stress and
Anxiety Inequalities Among U.S. College Students in the Time of COVID-19. J. Adolesc. Health 2021,68, 270–276. [CrossRef]
7.
Pintariˇc, Z.N.; Kravanja, Z. The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic in 2020 on the Quality of STEM Higher Education. Chem. Eng. Trans.
2020,81, 1315–1320. [CrossRef]
8.
Son, C.; Hegde, S.; Smith, A.; Wang, X.; Sasangohar, F. Effects of COVID-19 on College Students’ Mental Health in the United
States: Interview Survey Study. J. Med. Internet Res. 2020,22, e21279. [CrossRef]
9.
Jensen, K.J.; Cross, K.J. Engineering Stress Culture: Relationships among Mental Health, Engineering Identity, and Sense of
Inclusion. J. Eng. Educ. 2021,110, 371–392. [CrossRef]
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 17 of 18
10.
Jensen, K.J.; Vohra, S.R.; Mirabelli, J.F.; Kunze, A.J.; Miller, I.; Romanchek, T.E. CAREER: Supporting Undergraduate Mental
Health by Building a Culture of Wellness in Engineering. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Virtual,
26–29 July 2021.
11.
Prince, M.; Felder, R.; Brent, R. Active Student Engagement in Online Stem Classes: Approaches and Recommendations.
Adv. Eng. Educ. 2020,8, 1–25.
12.
Maxson, A.; Tomasko, D.L. Supporting the Mental Health and Wellness of Chemical Engineering Students at the Department and
College Levels. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Virtual, 22–26 June 2020.
13.
Hurst, C.S.; Baranik, L.E.; Daniel, F. College Student Stressors: A Review of the Qualitative Research. Stress Health
2013
,29, 275–285.
[CrossRef]
14.
Huberty, J.; Green, J.; Glissmann, C.; Larkey, L.; Puzia, M.; Lee, C. Efficacy of the Mindfulness Meditation Mobile App “Calm” to
Reduce Stress among College Students: Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2019,7, e14273. [CrossRef]
15.
Isolation, P.S. Descriptive Geometry in the Time of COVID-19: Preliminary Assessment of Distance Education during Pandemic
Social Isolation. Adv. Eng. Educ. 2020,8, 1–10.
16.
Gentry, S.P.; Chamberlain, J.M.; Bronner, C.E. Developing an Online Seminar to Support Students New to Distance Learning.
Adv. Eng. Educ. 2020,8, n4.
17.
Chang, C.N.; Saw, G.K.; Lomelí-Carrillo, U.; Zhi, M.; Romano, K.; Culbertson, R. Electronic Mentoring During the COVID-19
Pandemic: Effects on Engineering Graduate Students’ Academic, Career, and Mental Health Outcomes. In Proceedings of the
ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Virtual, 26–29 July 2021.
18.
Wang, X.; Hegde, S.; Son, C.; Keller, B.; Smith, A.; Sasangohar, F. Investigating Mental Health of US College Students during the
COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Survey Study. J. Med. Internet Res. 2020,22, e22817. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
19.
Van der Merwe, S.E.; Biggs, R.; Preiser, R.; Cunningham, C.; Snowden, D.J.; O’Brien, K.; Jenal, M.; Vosloo, M.; Blignaut, S.; Goh, Z.
Making Sense of Complexity: Using SenseMaker as a Research Tool. Systems 2019,7, 25. [CrossRef]
20.
Sochacka, N.W.; Culloty, C.M.; Hopkins, J.; Harrell, J.; Walther, J. Using SenseMaker
®
to Examine Student Experiences in
Engineering: A Discussion of the Affordances and Limitations of This Novel Research Approach Introduction. In Proceedings of
the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition 2020, Online, 22–26 June 2020.
21.
Kellam, N.N.; Gerow, K.S.; Walther, J. Narrative Analysis in Engineering Education Research: Exploring Ways of Constructing
Narratives to Have Resonance with the Reader and Critical Research Implications. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference
and Exposition 2015, Seattle, WA, USA, 14–17 June 2015.
22.
Artis, S.; Shavers, M.C.; LeSure, S.; Spencer, B.M.; Joshi, A.P. Re-Framing and Reimagining the Doctoral Student Narrative:
Black Women’s Experiences in Engineering and Computer Science. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education
2018, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, 23 June–27 July 2018; American Society for Engineering Education: Washington, DC, USA, 2018.
23.
Brewer, M.; Sochacka, N.W.; Walther, J. Into the Pipeline: A Freshman Student’s Experiences of Stories Told about Engineering.
In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education 2015, Seattle, WA, USA, 14–17 June 2015; American Society for
Engineering Education: Washington, DC, USA, 2015.
24.
Slaton, A.E.; Pawley, A.L. The Power and Politics of Engineering Education Research Design: Saving the ‘Small N’. Eng. Stud.
2018,10, 133–157. [CrossRef]
25.
Astin, A.W. Student Involvement: A Developmental Theory for Higher Education. In College Student Development and Academic
Life: Psychological, Intellectual, Social and Moral Issues; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 251–263.
26.
Milem, J.F.; Berger, J.B. A Modified Model of College Student Persistence: Exploring the Relationship between Astin’s Theory of
Involvement and Tinto’s Theory of Student Departure. J. Coll. Stud. Dev. 1997,38, 387–400.
27. Tobias, L.L. The Thriving Person and the Thriving Organization Parallels and Linkages. Consult. Psychol. J. 2004,56, 3–9. [CrossRef]
28.
Morelock, J.R.; Sochacka, N.W.; Lewis, R.S.; Culloty, C.M.; Hopkins, J.S.; Ofunne, C.K. Using a Novel Research Methodology to
Study and Respond to Faculty and Student Experiences with COVID-19 in Real Time. Adv. Eng. Educ. 2020,8, 1–14.
29.
Sochacka, N.W.; Al., E. Narrative Analysis of Stories Told about Engineering in the Public Discourse: Implications for Underrep-
resentation. Stud. Eng. Educ.. under revision.
30. Schreiner, L.A. Thriving in College. New Dir. Stud. Serv. 2013,2013, 41–52. [CrossRef]
31.
Miles, M.B.; Huberman, A.M.; Saldana, J. Qualitative Data Analysis. In Qualitative Data Analysis; Sage Publications: Thousand
Oaks, CA, USA, 2013; Volume 3, pp. 320–357. ISBN 0803922744.
32.
Shadish, W.R.; Cook, T.D.; Campbell, D.T. Construct Validity and External Validity. In Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs
for Generalized Causal Inference; Houghton Mifflin: Boston, MA, USA, 2002; Chapter 3.
33.
Creswell, J.W.; Miller, D.L. Determining Validity in Qualitatife Inquiry; College of Education, The Ohio State University: Columbus,
OH, USA, 2000; Volume 39, p. 7. [CrossRef]
34.
Lincoln, Y.S.; Guba, E.G. Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Research. In Major Paradigms and Perspectives; Sage Publications:
Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1994; Chapter 6.
35. Brown, M. The Sociology of Antiracism in Black and White. Sociol Compass 2017,11, e12451. [CrossRef]
36.
Naylor, L.L. Problems and Issues of Diversity in the United States. In Problems and Issues of Diversity in the United States; Bergin & Garvey:
Santa Barbara, CA, USA, 1999; ISBN 9780897896153.
37.
Hall, J.L. Disaggregating the Monolith: A Case Study on Varied Engineering Career Orientations and Strategies of Black Women in Tech;
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University: Blacksburg, VA, USA, 2021.
Educ. Sci. 2023,13, 643 18 of 18
38.
Revelo, R.A.; Mejia, J.A.; Villanueva, I. Who Are We? Beyond Monolithic Perspectives of Latinxs in Engineering. In Proceedings
of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Columbus, OH, USA, 24–28 June 2017; American Society for Engineering
Education: Washington, DC, USA, 2017.
39.
Eddy, S.L.; Brownell, S.E. Beneath the Numbers: A Review of Gender Disparities in Undergraduate Education across Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Math Disciplines. Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 2016,12, 020106. [CrossRef]
40.
Clark, S.L.; Dyar, C.; Maung, N.; London, B. Psychosocial Pathways to STEM Engagement among Graduate Students in the Life
Sciences. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2016,15, ar45. [CrossRef]
41.
Abes, E.S. Identity Development of Diverse Populations: Implications for Teaching and Administration in Higher Education
(Review). J. Higher Educ. 2005,76, 117–119. [CrossRef]
42.
Hughes, B.E. “Managing by Not Managing”: How Gay Engineering Students Manage Sexual Orientation Identity. J. Coll. Stud. Dev.
2017,58, 385–401. [CrossRef]
43.
Revelo Alonso, R.A. Engineering Identity Development of Latina and Latino Members of the Society of Hispanic Professional
Engineers. In Proceedings of the 122nd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Seattle, WA, USA, 14–17 June 2015; American
Society for Engineering Education: Washington, DC, USA, 2015; pp. 1–13.
44.
Lilley, C.M. Work in Progress: Intersection of Race and Gender on Experiences of Undergraduate Engineering Students of Color in
Positional Leadership Roles. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Virtual, 22–26 June 2020; American
Society for Engineering Education: Washington, DC, USA, 2020.
45.
Brown, H.P.; Rohde, J.A.; Godwin, A. Leaving Engineering: An Examination of the Reasons That Influence Black Women to
Depart (Work in Progress). In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Virtual Online, 22–26 June 2020.
46.
Cross, K.J.; Clancy, K.B.H.; Mendenhall, R.; Imoukhuede, P.; Amos, J.R. The Double Bind of Race and Gender: A Look into the
Experiences of Women of Color in Engineering. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Columbus, OH, USA,
24–28 June 2017. [CrossRef]
47.
Kirn, A.; Godwin, A.; Benson, L.; Potvin, G.; Doyle, J.; Boone, H.; Verdin, D. Intersectionality of Non-Normative Identities
in the Cultures of Engineering. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, New Orleans, LA, USA,
26 June–28 August 2016. [CrossRef]
48.
Mendenhall, R.; Cross, K.J.; Amos, J.R.; Clancy, K.B.H.; Imoukhuede, P.; Cromley, J.G. Intersecting Identities of Women in
Engineering. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, 23 June–27 July 2018.
[CrossRef]
49.
Nelson, K.G.; Shell, D.F.; Husman, J.; Fishman, E.J.; Soh, L.K. Motivational and Self-Regulated Learning Profiles of Students
Taking a Foundational Engineering Course. J. Eng. Educ. 2015,104, 74–100. [CrossRef]
50.
Atman, C.J. Hope, Stress, Sketch & Kvetch: Emphasizing Caring Through Reflection in Online Teaching in the Pandemic.
Adv. Eng. Educ. 2020,8, n4.
51.
Heffner, M. Transferring In-Class Rapport to a Virtual Classroom in a Technology Entrepreneurship Graduate Engineering Course.
Adv. Eng. Educ. 2020,8, n4.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note:
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
