Background: One emerging approach to diversity and inclusion in engineering is to take an assets‐based view of what students from nondominant communities bring to their education and work experiences.Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this review is to understand how community cultural wealth (CCW), an assets‐based framework, has been applied in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education research. We address research questions focused on (a) the characteristics of studies using CCW in STEM education, (b) examples of the six types of capital (aspirational, linguistic, familial, navigational, social, and resistant) in STEM educational settings, and (c) gaps and opportunities in how CCW is being applied in STEM education.Design/Method: We identified 33 dissertations, theses, journal articles, and conference papers using systematic review procedures. To qualify, each study must present empirical data and include at least one type of CCW capital in its results or discussion. We coded study characteristics, such as methods, participant populations, and research setting. We qualitatively analyzed each of the six types of CCW capital.Results: Studies tended to focus on higher education settings, engineering, and qualitative methods, particularly student interviews. We identified several specific engineering‐relevant examples of assets for each type of capital. Future work should collect data from faculty, staff, and family members identified in several studies as important to CCW in addition to foregrounding student voices.Conclusions: In synthesizing existing studies, this review provides insight into how an assets‐based framework is being interpreted and provides a foundation for more assets‐based perspectives in future engineering education work.

Contribution: This paper explores the factors contributing to the development of engineering identity in Latinx students at two institutions. A better understanding of these factors will support the development of more inclusive engineering education environments and experiences. Background: Persistence of Latinx engineering students is of particular interest due to their underrepresentation in the field. Identity is a lens for understanding student persistence, but Latinx students are underrepresented in prior engineering identity studies. This paper seeks to identify the unique factors, academic and professional, that contribute to engineering identity development, and potential means for supporting the persistence of Latinx engineers. Research Questions: 1) What academic and professional affect factors predict engineering identity development of Latinx students? and 2) What role does the institution play in Latinx students' engineering identity development? Methodology: A mixed-methods approach was used to measure engineering identity based on a framework incorporating both academic and professional affect elements. Regression analyses were conducted on 892 responses to an online survey from Latinx engineering students, with additional insight from interviews with ten Latinx engineering students. Findings: Six of the nine factors analyzed (performance/competence, interest, recognition, analysis, framing and solving problems, and tinkering) were significant predictors of Latinx students' engineering identity, as were institution, gender, and having a parent with an engineering degree. Engineering identity was higher for Latinx students at the Hispanic Serving Institution, but none of the interaction terms were significant, so the relationship between these factors and engineering identity is similar at each institution.

Background: Despite many initiatives to improve graduate student and faculty diversity in engineering, there has been little or no change in the percentage of people from racially minoritized backgrounds in either of these groups.Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this paper is to counter the scarcity fallacy, in which institutions blame the “shortage” of qualified people from traditionally marginalized backgrounds for their own lack of representation, related to prospective PhD students and prospective faculty from traditionally marginalized groups. This study identifies the BS‐to‐PhD and PhD‐to‐tenure‐track‐faculty institutional pathways of Black/African American and Hispanic/Latino engineering doctorate recipients.Design/Method: Using the US Survey of Earned Doctorates, we tracked the BS‐to‐PhD institutional pathways of 3952 Black/African American and 5732 Hispanic/Latino engineering PhD graduates. We also used the Survey of Doctorate Recipients to track the PhD‐to‐tenure‐track faculty pathways of 104 Black/African American and 211 Hispanic/Latino faculty.Results: The majority of Black/African American and Hispanic/Latino PhD graduates in this study did not earn their BS degrees from Top 25 institutions, but rather from Not Top 25, non‐US, and minority‐serving institutions. The results also show the relatively small proportion of PhD earners and faculty members who move into highly ranked institutions after earning a bachelor's degree from outside this set of institutions.Conclusions: The findings of this study have important implications for graduate student and faculty recruitment by illustrating that recruitment from a narrow range of institutions (i.e., Top 25 institutions) is unlikely to result in increased diversity among racially minoritized PhDs and faculty in engineering.

We summarize national-scale data for Ph.D. earners in engineering or computer science from 2015 to 2019 whose post-graduate school employment is known, highlighting outcomes for biological/biomedical/biosystems engineering students. We use NSF’s Survey of Earned Doctorates (SED), which has collected information from Ph.D. recipients in the USA since 1957. The data are collected at the time of degree completion and constitute a greater than 90% response rate. Compared to all engineering and computer science disciplines, biological/biomedical/biosystems engineering has a higher proportion going to 4yr/med/research institutions (52% vs. 33%) and non-profit (3.6% vs. 2.9%) and lower proportion going to industry (33% vs. 48%), government (4.3% vs. 8.4%), and is similar for non-US positions (6.1% vs. 5.7%). Compared to 2010–2014 biological/biomedical/biosystems engineering Ph.D. recipients, more 2015–2019 recipients are going to industry (25% to 33%) and fewer to 4yr/med/research institutions (59% to 52%) and governmet (5.3% to 4.3%). Across all engineering and computer science disciplines, a smaller proportion of females entered industry (43%) compared to males (49%), while a larger proportion of females entered 4yr/med/research institutions (37%) compared to males (32%). Over half of Asian doctoral recipients entered industry, as compared to 38% of Hispanic doctoral recipients. In contrast, a higher proportion of Hispanic individuals (37%) entered 4yr/med/research institutions after their doctoral programs, as compared to 31% of Asian doctoral recipients. Black doctoral recipients had the highest proportion enter positions in government (14%) and non-profit (4%) sectors. Our results are situated in the broader literature focused on postdoctoral career, training, and employment sectors and trends in STEM. We discuss implications for graduate programs, policymakers, and researchers.

In the US and Europe, institutions, foundations and governments invest significant financial resources in doctoral fellowships. Unlike other graduate funding mechanisms, fellowships are typically not tied to specific projects or job responsibilities and thus may afford more agency to students. We examined how fellowship funding contributes to or undermines agency of doctoral student recipients. We interviewed 23 US engineering doctoral students primarily funded on a fellowship for at least one semester. We qualitatively analyzed the interviews, using inductive and deductive methods of coding. Participants described increased flexibility with their projects, advisor, and personal life; additional access to physical resources, people and networks, and research experiences; and feelings of internal validation and external recognition from fellowship awards. Contexts of advising, timing of fellowship, source of fellowship, financial circumstances, and fellowship structure influenced their experiences. Agentic perspectives and actions included choice of advisor and research projects, switching advisors if necessary, completing internships and visiting other labs, and enjoying a higher standard of living. Advisor support is a necessity for students funded on fellowships. Multi-year fellowships from external sources, in comparison to internal sources, more often supported agency. We make recommendations for institutions to structure and administer fellowships to better support students.

Background: Community cultural wealth (CCW) has become more widely used as a theoretical framework in engineering education research. However, limited studies illustrate the use of CCW within the classroom, and it is unknown how engineering students would interpret or respond to the framework. Purpose/Hypothesis: The goal of the study was to understand how students of color conceptualize the forms of capital and make connections between capital and their own lives, following a CCW‐based intervention. Design/Method: A classroom intervention involving four written reflections and one lecture based on CCW was incorporated into a technical engineering elective taught during a month‐long study abroad course for students from one US university. This paper considers responses from the final reflection, which we deductively coded for the six forms of CCW capital and inductively coded to analyze students' perceptions of each. Results: Following the intervention, students described how their lived experiences provided them with valuable forms of capital that can help them reach their personal and professional goals. All six forms of capital resonated with students, and they shared concrete ideas for how they planned to use their identified assets after returning home from study abroad. Conclusions: Counterstories emerged from the students in their responses to the reflection prompts. The detail provided in the reflections and framing of certain life experiences as assets suggest that students benefitted from learning about the framework. We recommend further development of CCW‐based interventions for the classroom and in extracurricular settings.