|
An Evaluation of Pipeline Interventions for Minority Scholars
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Jean Shin, American Sociological Association, shin@asanet.org
|
| Roberta Spalter-Roth, American Sociological Association, spalter-roth@asanet.org
|
| Olga Mayorova, American Sociological Association, mayorova@asanet.org
|
| Abstract:
For over a quarter century there has been significant concern about the small number of under-represented minorities in the science pipeline. One oft-proposed solution is to improve mentoring activities since mentoring is considered to be integral to increasing representation. Mentoring in this sense is usually thought of as a dyadic relationship. The purpose of this evaluation is to compare PhD alumni from two nationally-recognized funding programs, one for under-represented minorities and the other largely white, along with a randomly-selected control group. In the largely-white program, dyadic mentoring is the norm. In the under-represented minority program, mentoring through networks of scholars, teachers, and peers is the norm. The evaluation disentangles the effects of minority status and mentoring for the career trajectories, scientific productivity, and professional service for these groups. The evaluation's measures of effects include unobtrusive measures of academic employment, years to tenure, network analyses of co-authorship patterns, and service activities.
|
|
Learning from Student Voices: Engaging in an Empowering Needs Assessment to Motivate Higher Education Institutional Change
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Divya Bheda, University of Oregon, dbheda@uoregon.edu
|
| Abstract:
This paper offers the results of a needs assessment at one Pacific North-Western University regarding international students' needs on campus. This evaluation actively sought the participation of the students as active stakeholders, and decision-makers in the evaluation process. The evaluative process was an internal, formative process, driven by feminist principles of beginning with the lived experiences of the marginalized stakeholders—international students-who were also the evaluators(These students' voices/input was not previously sought by the institution during policy-making that affected the services for these international students. The collaborative approach elicited responsiveness within the institution, resulted in greater buy-in for the evaluation process, and generated more meaningful recommendations for the institution. The process resulted in students feeling more empowered because they had more control over institutional adoption of recommendations than merely being subjects and informants within the evaluation process. Learnings from, and challenges of the evaluative process will also be discussed.
|
| |