Re: Professional Role Confidence and Gendered Persistence in Engineering

Some blog followers might be interested in “Re: Professional Role Confidence and Gendered Persistence in Engineering” [Hake (2011)].

The abstract reads:

************************************************
ABSTRACT: Robert Fuller of the PhysLrnR list referenced an Inside Higher Ed report on “Professional Role Confidence and Gendered Persistence in Engineering” [Cech et al. (2011)] and asked in his subject line “How relevant is this to physics?” In my opinion:

a. YES! -Cech et al. (2011)] IS relevant to physics. According to Berrett (2011): “Cech et al. suggest that the findings about professional-role confidence may be relevant in other fields in which women are historically underrepresented, including physical science and medical specialties such as surgery.”

b. A companion piece “Professional Role Confidence and Gendered Persistence in Physics” could be probably be extracted from the resources in “Gender Issues in Science/Math Education (GISME)” [Hake & Mallow (2008) at http://bit.ly/gXdrvR (8.5 MB) and http://bit.ly/fBTzqV (4.8 MB)].
************************************************

To access the complete 11 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/vtdY62 .

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References which
Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)

rrhake@earthlink.net
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi
http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com
http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake


REFERENCES [All URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 4 Nov 2011.]
Berrett, D. 2011. "Lack of Confidence as Professionals Spurs Women to Leave Engineering, Study Finds." The Chronicle of Higher Education, 25 October; online at http://bit.ly/vFNSWC.

Cech, E., B. Rubineau, S. Silbey, and C. Seron. 2011. “Professional Role Confidence and Gendered Persistence in Engineering,” American
Sociological Review 76 (5): 641.

Hake, R.R. 2011. “Re: Professional Role Confidence and Gendered Persistence in Engineering” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/vtdY62. Post of 4 Nov 2011 14:45:16-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.

Over Two-Hundred Annotated References on Systems Thinking

Some blog followers may be interested a compilation [Hake (2009)] of the above title. The abstract reads:

ABSTRACT: This 1.7 MB compilation of over 200 annotated references andover 300 hot-linked URL’s provides a window into the vast literature on “Systems Thinking.”

Systems Thinking is characterized by the consideration of natural, scientific, engineered, human, or conceptual entities as systems in which the component parts interact with one another and with other systems so as to produce emergent properties which cannot be understood through analysis of the single parts of the system.

Examples are provided by twelve quotes of systems thinkers.

References are given in alphabetical order with superscripts that indicate their origin in the following categories: Ecology, Economics, Education, Engineering, Evaluation, General, and Physics.

To access the complete compilation please click on http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/200RefsSystems2c.pdf (1.78 MB).

REFERENCES

Hake, R.R. 2009. "Over Two-Hundred Annotated References on Systems Thinking," online at http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/200RefsSystems2c.pdf (1.7 MB) and as reference #58 at http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/.

The Burden of Proof #2

Some blog readers may be interested in a recent discussion list post "Re: The Burden of Proof #2" [Hake (2009)]. The abstract reads:

**********************************************************
ABSTRACT: Kevin Carey in his blog post "The Burden of Proof," quoted Paul Basken's report "Engineering Schools Prove Slow to Change" on a Carnegie Foundation study that bemoand "a faculty culture resistant to change." Carey objects to blaming the slowness of change in engineering schools on culture because, in his view, "the more autonomy faculty are given in the classroom, the greater the burden the burden of proof to demonstrate that their choices are actually working.

But the problem is that most faculty fail to discharge their burden of proof of student learning because they (and administrators) are immersed in a culture that relies on course exams and Student Evaluations of Teaching (SET's) to gauge student learning - both of which typically measure lower-level educational objectives such as memory of facts and definitions rather than higher-level outcomes such as critical thinking and non-algorithmic problem solving.

How then can faculty measure their students' higher-level learning from start to finish of a course? As demonstrated by the physics education reform effort, by direct formative evaluation of students' domain-specific learning through pre/post testing using: (a) valid and consistently reliable tests of conceptual understanding devised by disciplinary experts, and (b) traditional courses as controls.

Such definitive evaluation of the cognitive impact of courses has (a) increased student learning in some U.S. introductory physics courses (including large enrollment classes at California Polytechnic at San Luis Obispo, Harvard, MIT, North Carolina State, and the University of Colorado); (b) is gradually gaining a foothold in introductory astronomy, biology, chemistry, economics, engineering, geoscience, and math; and (c) has the potential to gradually enhance the effectiveness of higher education generally, including that in engineering.
*********************************************************

To access the entire 28 kB post please click on http://tinyurl.com/d4yy45

REFERENCES
Hake, R.R. 2009. "Re: The Burden of Proof #2," AERA-L post of 23 February 2009 14:57:57-0800; online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://tinyurl.com/d4yy45