Prior Research

Completed Research Projects (Published work from many of the more recent projects can be found on the CERSE bibliography)

• Washington STate Academic RedShirt (STARS) Program Research, PI: E. Riskin, University of Washington, 2018-2019 & 2022: Funded by multiple NSF S-STEM grants, this research examined the benefits of the STARS program, which supports academically talented, underprepared engineering students at the University of Washington through a “redshirt” year of preparation for engineering majors. STARS-related research resulted in a conference paper examining demographic variations in the effect of STARS on academic outcomes and a journal article examining the counterspaces established by the program and their benefits.
  • Carll, E., Rajouria, A., Wilson, D., Cunningham, S., Riskin, E., & Litzler, E. (2024). Engineering Counterspaces to Address Inequities in Preparation for Undergraduate Academics. Studies in Engineering Education, 5(2).
• Diversifying STEM: increasing women’s persistence on the transfer pathway in engineering and computer science, PI: R. Rincon, Society of Women Engineers (SWE), 2019-2020. Funded by the Society of Women Engineers’ Corporate Partnership Council and the Northrop Grumman Foundation, this research used a mixed-methods approach to examine engineering self-efficacy, motivations, and confidence among women on the 2-year transfer pathway in engineering and computer science. This research resulted in a conference presentation and a report published through the SWE, and was the motivation for a series of community college networking events hosted by SWE and evaluated by CERSE.
• Graduate Climate in Science and Engineering.  The Science and Engineering Graduate Student Experience Survey explores the extent to which graduate students feel comfortable and supported in their department.  It asks questions about classroom experiences, laboratory experiences, department climate, professional development, relationships with faculty and mentors, academic program status and work/family balance.  The graduate climate survey has been administered multiple times at the University of Washington during the term of the UW ADVANCE Institutional Transformation grant.
• Mentoring Program & Graduate Student Tracking The Center for Evaluation & Research for STEM Equity administered and evaluated a graduate mentoring program for graduate students in science and engineering fields, with a focus on women and under-represented minorities. CERSE offered two mentoring programs: The Faculty and Graduate Mentoring Program and the Nanotechnology Mentoring Program. CERSE used evaluation data from the mentoring program and student tracking data, with approval of the UW Institutional Review Board, to answer important questions about graduate student progress. This research was partially funded by the NSF IGERT for nanotechnology and the NSF National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NNIN) grant. The student tracking system created by CERSE includes three questionnaires. One is administered to students upon entry to the program, the next is administered to students at the end of each year in the program, and the last is administered shortly after graduation from the program.
• Project to Assess Climate in Engineering (PACE) Funded primarily by The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation with a supplemental grant from The Engineering Information Foundation, the Project to Assess Climate in Engineering (PACE) was an eight year, multi-site mixed mode research and intervention project intended to identify issues that affect persistence rates among engineering undergraduates. While this grant is currently over, CERSE continues to work on manuscripts from this data. PACE is headquartered at the Center for Evaluation & Research for STEM Equity at the University of Washington and pays specific attention to the intersection of race, gender and academic experience. The PACE survey, which was designed and pre-tested to accurately measure undergraduate engineering climate (culture), was administered online in 2008 to students at all 22 PACE institutions and again in 2012 at 16 of the PACE institutions. The new 2012 survey results enable assessment of the change in climate at the PACE schools.   The survey included questions about their experiences in the classroom and the laboratory and also about their interactions with peers, professors, teaching assistants and administrators. In addition, the survey asks questions about challenges to work-life balance, academic self-confidence; future career plans and the roles students believe race, ethnicity and gender play in today’s engineering departments. Qualitative data was also collected through one-on-one interviews and focus groups with students. Schools received reports that summarized the survey results and offered benchmarking data for up to three peer institutions. Reports also integrated the quantitative and qualitative results and offered a list of recommendations to improve retention.
• Ten-Year Longitudinal Study  CERSE conducted a 10-year longitudinal study tracking female engineering and science students from the point of entry in college through graduation to examine persistence and attrition factors. Funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.
• Undergraduate Retention and Career Outcomes Study (URCOS) Funded by NSF, URCOS built upon a ten-year longitudinal study of female undergraduate science and engineering students at the University of Washington. The goal of the study was to identify career outcomes of undergraduate education in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields by collecting longitudinal data of students’ experiences beyond the bachelor’s degree. In addition to UW, two higher education institutions participated as pilot sites: the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and the University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez. Two of the pilot sites have well-developed WISE programs with a broad range of services; UPRM has related support services. The outcomes of this study include:
  • A template for a user-friendly data collection method for tracking student support program participation and career outcomes.
  • A web-mediated survey instrument and data collection method used by institutions nationwide and analyzed by CERSE.
  • An exit survey and a professional survey to gather career outcomes information.
  • The results of a pilot-test at three institutions.
• University of Washington Undergraduate Climate in Science and Engineering  CERSE created the Engineering Undergraduate Student Experience Survey. CERSE conducted an 8-year assessment of the climate in engineering at the University of Washington to evaluate male and female students’ perceptions of the quality of their engineering experience. The survey is based on the WEPAN national climate survey. The survey asks fifty-nine questions, most of which assess student experiences. It asks questions about the quality of faculty teaching, quality of teaching assistants, quality of lab work, academic confidence, discrimination, and organizational involvement. Nine questions relate to demographic information, so that the responses can be linked to gender, ethnicity, year in school, and citizenship status.
• WEPAN National Climate Survey  CERSE designed and implemented a WEPAN national climate survey at 29 institutions to assess the climate for male and female students in engineering. Funded by the Engineering Information Foundation.
• Nanotechnology Workforce – Career Pathways, Perceptions of Risks, and Public Awareness CERSE  interviewed nanoscientist and nanoengineers at four NNIN sites regarding three areas: 1) Career pathways of men and women scientists; 2) Perceptions of risks and benefits of technology; and 3) Views on social and ethical awareness in the nanotechnology community. The four institutions were Cornell, Georgia Tech, Stanford and the University of Washington (UW). A total of 49 nanoscientists were interviewed.
• Scientific Communication about Social and Ethical Issues Related to Nanotechnology Building on research in the ethnography of communication, the aim is to identify how scientists and engineers talk about science, society, and ethics. The study is based on four years of fieldwork and in-depth interviews with 20 nanoscience faculty at the University of Washington Center for Nanotechnology. Specific notions about scientific responsibility, interdisciplinary collaboration, and communicating with other scientists and the public are examined. (Study ended 2009).
• Nanoethics Course A special topics course in nanoethics was developed and taught (Winter 2009) by Marjorie Olmstead (Physics) and Deborah Bassett (CERSE). The course attracted 15 students (including 2 postdocs and a visiting scholar from Europe) from science and engineering, social sciences, and the humanities. The course featured weekly presentations from faculty involved with nanotech and studies of nanotech from across the UW campus and Robert McGinn (NNIN SEI researcher from Stanford). Students in the course developed short case studies on ethical aspects of nanotechnology to be used as study guides by future students and industry.
• Public Health and Nanotechnology Perceptions A research project entitled “Perceived Risks and Hazards of Nanotechnology Development – Comparisons among Faculty at the University of Washington Affiliated with Nanotechnology / Nanoscience and Environmental Health Science” was completed and submitted as a graduate student’s master’s thesis in public health. This study surveyed University of Washington faculty associated with the Center for Nanotechnology or the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health Sciences.  Faculty members (116) were invited to participate in an online or phone survey; 52 responded.  The results of this study mirrored previous findings (2004 Cobb and Macoubrie study and 2005 Macoubrie study) including 1) that people with more knowledge of nanotechnology are more likely to think the benefits of nano-development will outweigh the risks; 2) that there is a general lack of definition of nanotechnology among the field’s own community; and 3) that there is lack of trust in regulatory agencies to prevent hazards from nano-development.
• Identifying and Analyzing the Discourse(s) of Nanotechnology and Nanoscience The research project entitled “Identifying and Analyzing the discourse(s) of nanotechnology and nanoscience” was concluded in 2009.  This project was the basis for Deborah Bassett’s Ph.D. dissertation in communication. The study consisted of an ethnography of communication that identified the various discourses about social and ethical implications of nanotechnology and nanoscience (SEIN), and in so doing, provided a taxonomy that enables researchers from different disciplinary backgrounds to engage with each other, as well as with the media, and the public at large in meaningful discussion about nanotechnology and nanoscience. Drawing upon literature in intercultural communication, this study identified what issues related to SEIN are considered significant within different discourse communities (e.g., nanoscientists, social scientists, ethicists, popular media, the public at large, etc.), described how these issues are talked about (e.g., what imagery or metaphors are used to discuss SEIN), and suggested ways in which the various discourses might be appropriated in order to promote collaboration among the discourse communities (e.g., an interdisciplinary research team).
• Nanotechnology Workforce A survey focusing on the nanotechnology personnel needs of companies and demographics of the nanotechnology workforce at these same companies was developed. Some data on the future nanotechnology workforce was collected from students in the University of Washington interdisciplinary nanotechnology Ph.D. program, and students who had taken nanotechnology courses.
• Mentoring and Tracking of Nanotechnology Graduate Students In 2001, the Center for Evaluation & Research for STEM Equity (CERSE) partnered with the Center for Nanotechnology (CNT) at the University of Washington to develop a system to track student progress through the new, interdisciplinary program in Nanotechnology and to create the Nanotechnology Graduate Student Mentoring Program. The report linked below is the fifth annual report from the Center for Evaluation & Research for STEM Equity detailing the major findings from student tracking and from the mentoring evaluations.