Diversity in Engineering

The recent release of employment data from some of the top tech companies in Silicon Valley (SV) has stirred a national debate about diversity in the industry. Currently, most of the SV companies employ underrepresented minorities (URMs) and women at a percentage that is not representative of the U.S. population or degrees awarded to engineers. However, are the percentages representative with respect to URMs and women earning engineering degrees? This paper assesses the use of population parity as an adequate benchmark for measuring diversity in industry using SV as a case study. This work suggests using a novel measure called degree parity as a more appropriate measure. Furthermore, this paper addresses some of the factors that hinder companies from reaching degree parity and offers recommendations as to how companies can improve their diversity record. Results from our analyses indicate that for women, blacks, and Hispanics/Latinos, no company has reached population parity in regards to all domestic employees. However, for women, every SV company has met degree parity when looking at the overall representation of their respective companies. For women in the technical business sectors, only two SV companies have reached degree parity. For blacks, three out of the eleven largest SV companies have reached degree parity in both their overall company representation and technical business sectors. In regards to Hispanics/Latinos, one company has reached degree parity when looking at overall representation and technical business sectors. For Asian Americans, every SV company has met and exceeded degree and population parity in regards to overall representation and technical business sectors. For Whites, only one SV company has met and exceeded degree and population parity with respect to overall representation and technical business sectors. Colleges, universities, and companies continue to work hard to increase the numbers of successful URM and women students in the pathway to engineering careers. A more thorough review of the recruitment and promotion process is needed to ensure that the culture and environment of SV companies are equipped to receive and retain a more diverse pool of graduates and impact diversity in all areas of employment.

Background. Higher educational programs in engineering today are seeking to correct disproportionately low enrollment and success rates of minoritized students. However, most diversity-related programming fails to address systems of structural oppression that cause particular students to be underrepresented in higher education. In addition, typical engineering pedagogical methods fail to address the reality and impacts of structural oppression, as educators cannot overcome the effects of structurally oppressive systems through traditional methods of controlling classroom and curriculum. Purpose. This paper explores the relationship between existing critical and liberative theories and engineering educational systems and re-frames the goals and problems of diversity and equity within engineering education from a critical and liberative lens. Methodology/Approach. We describe existing liberative pedagogies and their aim to dismantle oppressive systems through recognition of hegemonic structures, critical classroom discourse, and opportunities to build solidarity. We present an overview of previous uses of these pedagogies in engineering classrooms under the premise of Freirean critical theory, which is class-based, and other anti-oppressive theories based on race, gender, and sexual orientation. We propose a new model that situates these theories relative to one another within the broader classification of identity-based theories. Conclusions. Class-based exploitation under capitalist economic and governmental structures is identified as the root cause of inequitable educational outcomes. Thus, in order to correct inequities in education, the role of current educational systems in the perpetuation of capitalist oppression must itself be addressed. This will require pedagogical changes as well as explicitly restructuring the goals of engineering education to include equity and solidarity. Implications. Through an embrace of critical and liberative theories and their accompanying pedagogies, engineering educators and engineering education researchers can plant the seeds for change. When engineers develop the skills necessary to recognize and combat oppression, they will be able to work toward liberation for all oppressed peoples.