Thirty years after women became 50 percent of the college graduates in the United States, men still hold the vast majority of leadership positions in government and industry. This means that women’s voices are still not heard equally in the decisions that most affect our lives. In LEAN IN, Sheryl Sandberg examines why women’s progress in achieving leadership roles has stalled, explains the root causes, and offers compelling, commonsense solutions that can empower women to achieve their full potential.

每月一書：Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead

We searched and meta-analyzed studies comparing flipped classroom teaching with traditional, lecture-based teaching to evaluate the evidence for the flipped classroom’s influence on continuous-lear...

/pdf/does-the-flipped-classroom-improve-student-learning-and-1ez4of5hhe.pdf

Does the Flipped Classroom Improve Student Learning and Satisfaction? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis:

The “leaky pipeline” entails the progressive loss of competent women faculty members in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). These leaks have been identified at various career stages, including selection, promotion, and retention. Efforts to increase female representation in STEM academia have had mixed results: Although the overall percentage of STEM women faculty has increased in recent decades, the percentage of women of color faculty (WOCF) in STEM has decreased. These differential effects may stem from the fact that most existing interventions for increasing female representation in STEM academia have not been intersectional in nature. However, when the intersectionality of race ethnicity and gender are accounted for, WOCF are more likely to thrive professionally and feel like they matter to the institution. In this article, intersectionality theory is employed to identify the specific barriers in selection, promotion, and retention faced by WOCF within the scope of academic STEM careers and to identify the types of interventions that are likely to be particularly effective at fixing these leaks. In doing so, this article provides a framework for future research in the area of improving diversity and inclusion of WOCF in STEM. S C I E N T I F I C A B S T R A C T There has been a great deal of research on the concept of the “leaky pipeline,” which is the progressive loss of competent women faculty in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Research has shown that women academics are less likely than men to be selected, promoted, and retained in STEM departments. In recent years, there have been programs to increase the representation of women in STEM departments, which have resulted in increasing the overall percentage of STEM women faculty in the United States. However, despite these efforts, the percentage of women of color faculty (WOCF) in STEM has decreased. This simultaneous increase in overall numbers of women faculty in STEM and decrease in numbers of women of color faculty in STEM might be because these programs did not consider intersectional barriers. When the intersectionality of race ethnicity and gender is accounted for, WOCF are more likely to thrive professionally and feel like they matter to the institution. In this article, we consider the unique challenges faced by WOCF in STEM departments within selection, promotion, and retention. Furthermore, we identify the types of interventions and programs that are likely to be particularly effective at fixing these leaks within the pipeline. Last, we call for more research to be conducted to assess whether these programs are actually helpful in remediating these disparities for women of color in STEM departments.

Patching the “Leaky Pipeline”: Interventions for Women of Color Faculty in STEM Academia

Some studies of active learning methods suggest that they are effective teaching tools, whereas others have found them to be no better than traditional lecture methods. The situation is much like the one that began to play out in the 1950s with respect to the effects of psychotherapy. In that realm, it eventually became clear that the question “does therapy work?” was not the right one. It was more important to ask “which therapies result in clinically significant benefits when delivered by whom in what manner to which clients with what problems and how durable are the benefits”? This article suggests that it is time for researchers in the scholarship of teaching and learning to go beyond asking whether active learning “works” and address instead of a set of deeper questions about it. Doing so will require a more systematic and critical analysis of existing evidence as well as a new generation of research designed specifically to fill in the gaps in our understanding of what active learning methods can and cannot do.

Does active learning work? A good question, but not the right one.

Social justice and career development: Progress, problems, and possibilities

Team-based learning (TBL) is a pedagogical method developed as a response to the problems of large classes. Since its development, TBL has been widely used by educators in many fields, but there has not been a quantitative synthesis of the literature. We meta-analyzed the literature on TBL’s relation to academic outcomes and found 38 publications that met our inclusion criteria. Based on those publications, on average TBL courses produced better learning outcomes a little less than .5 standard deviation higher than did the comparison pedagogical methods. There was a great deal of variability in the effect sizes across studies, however. Although some of this variability may be explained by differences between education levels or course content, it does not explain much of the variation. Thus, our findings suggest that more research is needed to determine the factors that make TBL most effective.

The effectiveness of team-based learning on academic outcomes: A meta-analysis.

Miner et al.’s (2018) interpretation of gender inequity in STEM fields as a social-structural problem shifts the onus from “her” as the root of the problem to “us” as a society. However, despite noting the “even bleaker” outlook for women of color early on, the focal article lacks an intersectional focus, ignoring the differential experiences that exist between white women and women of color. Crenshaw's (1991) original work on intersectionality highlighted the fact that the experiences of women of color (WOC) often differ drastically from those of their White counterparts, and the subsequent body of intersectionality literature in a variety of fields reminds us that failing to include an intersectional perspective is an oversight we can no longer afford to make. With this in mind, we highlight the ways in which those at the intersection of both gender and racial minority status face a “double bind” (Malcom & Malcom, 2011), such that they are additionally disadvantaged by society's perceptions and expectations of the behavior of WOC.

/pdf/intersectionally-insufficient-a-necessary-expansion-of-the-3dyb2mcdk3.pdf

Intersectionally Insufficient: A Necessary Expansion of the Social-Structural Lens

This Research Work-in-progress paper presents a project that intends to increase student engagement, retention, and success through the implementation of a faculty development program focused on implicit bias and active learning. To assess the extent to which the program resulted in transformative changes in instructor teaching, the project team conducted classroom observations using minute-by-minute environmental scans and the Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS). The project team found that the COPUS could not capture all the behaviors that needed to be observed to assess the faculty development project. Thus, 12 emergent COPUS codes were developed to code the required behaviors. Each code is defined, examples are provided, and excerpts of classroom observations with and without the emergent COPUS codes are examined. The project team thinks the emergent COPUS codes, generally focused on faculty behaviors related to classroom climate, will be useful in other classroom observation projects.

Developing Emergent Codes for the Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS)

The differences between ‘work as imagined’ (WAI) and ‘work as done’ (WAD) reflect theoretically pervasive and well-known barriers to the examination of human performance at work. Due to the dynamic...

Sin-Ning Cindy Liu

Papers

Patching the “Leaky Pipeline”: Interventions for Women of Color Faculty in STEM Academia

The effectiveness of team-based learning on academic outcomes: A meta-analysis.

Intersectionally Insufficient: A Necessary Expansion of the Social-Structural Lens

Developing Emergent Codes for the Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS)

Where Two Ends Meet: Operator and Stakeholder Perceptions of Procedures: