Engineering ableism: The exclusion and devaluation of engineering students and professionals with physical disabilities and chronic and mental illness

IF 3.9 2区 工程技术 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Erin A. Cech
{"title":"Engineering ableism: The exclusion and devaluation of engineering students and professionals with physical disabilities and chronic and mental illness","authors":"Erin A. Cech","doi":"10.1002/jee.20522","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>The experiences of students and professionals with disabilities are routinely excluded from scholarly and policy debates about equity in engineering. Emergent research suggests that engineering is particularly ableist, yet systematic accounts of the possible exclusion and devaluation faced by engineers with disabilities are largely missing.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose/Hypothesis</h3>\n \n <p>This paper asks, do engineers with disabilities have more negative interpersonal experiences in engineering classrooms and workplaces than those without disabilities? Utilizing a social relational model of disability, I hypothesize that engineers with physical disabilities and chronic and mental illness are more likely to experience exclusion and professional devaluation than their peers and, partly as a result, have lower persistence intentions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Data/Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The paper uses survey data from 1729 students enrolled in eight US engineering programs (American Society for Engineering Education Diversity and Inclusion Survey) and 8321 US-employed engineers (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Inclusion Study Survey). Analyses use regression, mediation, and intersectional approaches.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Consistent with expectations, engineering students and professionals with disabilities are less likely than their peers to experience <i>social inclusion</i> and <i>professional respect</i> at school and work. Students with disabilities are more likely to <i>intend to leave their engineering programs</i> and professionals with disabilities are more likely to have <i>thought about leaving their engineering jobs</i> compared to peers, and their greater risks of encountering interpersonal bias help account for these differences. Analyses also reveal intersectional variation by gender and race/ethnicity.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>These results suggest that engineering harbors widespread ableism across education and work. The findings demand more scholarly attention to the social, cultural, and physical barriers that block people with disabilities from full and equal participation in engineering.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50206,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"112 2","pages":"462-487"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10544659/pdf/nihms-1932057.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Engineering Education","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jee.20522","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The experiences of students and professionals with disabilities are routinely excluded from scholarly and policy debates about equity in engineering. Emergent research suggests that engineering is particularly ableist, yet systematic accounts of the possible exclusion and devaluation faced by engineers with disabilities are largely missing.

Purpose/Hypothesis

This paper asks, do engineers with disabilities have more negative interpersonal experiences in engineering classrooms and workplaces than those without disabilities? Utilizing a social relational model of disability, I hypothesize that engineers with physical disabilities and chronic and mental illness are more likely to experience exclusion and professional devaluation than their peers and, partly as a result, have lower persistence intentions.

Data/Methods

The paper uses survey data from 1729 students enrolled in eight US engineering programs (American Society for Engineering Education Diversity and Inclusion Survey) and 8321 US-employed engineers (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Inclusion Study Survey). Analyses use regression, mediation, and intersectional approaches.

Results

Consistent with expectations, engineering students and professionals with disabilities are less likely than their peers to experience social inclusion and professional respect at school and work. Students with disabilities are more likely to intend to leave their engineering programs and professionals with disabilities are more likely to have thought about leaving their engineering jobs compared to peers, and their greater risks of encountering interpersonal bias help account for these differences. Analyses also reveal intersectional variation by gender and race/ethnicity.

Conclusion

These results suggest that engineering harbors widespread ableism across education and work. The findings demand more scholarly attention to the social, cultural, and physical barriers that block people with disabilities from full and equal participation in engineering.

Abstract Image

工程狂:对身体残疾、慢性病和精神疾病的工程专业学生和专业人员的排斥和贬低。
背景:残疾学生和专业人士的经历经常被排除在关于工程公平的学术和政策辩论之外。新兴研究表明,工程学特别有能力,但对残疾工程师可能面临的排斥和贬值的系统描述在很大程度上缺失。目的/假设:本文问道,残疾工程师在工程教室和工作场所是否比非残疾工程师有更多的负面人际体验?利用残疾的社会关系模型,我假设患有身体残疾、慢性病和精神疾病的工程师比同龄人更有可能经历排斥和职业贬值,部分原因是他们的坚持意愿较低。数据/方法:该论文使用了来自8个美国工程项目(ASEE多样性和包容性调查)的1729名学生和8321名美国雇佣工程师(STEM包容性研究调查)的调查数据。分析使用回归、中介和交叉方法。结果:与预期一致,工程系学生和残疾专业人员在学校和工作中比同龄人更不可能体验到社会包容和职业尊重。与同龄人相比,残疾学生更有可能打算离开他们的工程项目,残疾专业人员更有可能考虑离开他们的工程学工作,他们遇到人际偏见的更大风险有助于解释这些差异。分析还揭示了性别和种族/民族的交叉差异。结论:这些结果表明,工程在教育和工作中普遍存在能力主义。研究结果要求学术界更多地关注阻碍残疾人充分平等参与工程的社会、文化和身体障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Engineering Education
Journal of Engineering Education 工程技术-工程:综合
CiteScore
12.20
自引率
11.80%
发文量
47
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Engineering Education (JEE) serves to cultivate, disseminate, and archive scholarly research in engineering education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信