View
216
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Widening the Research Pipeline
Update to
NSF/CISE BPC Evaluation Workshop
December 7, 2006
Purpose of Project
Broadening participation in the research end of computing
In particular, encouraging underrepresented groups to earn PhDs and develop research careers in academia or industry
This means starting at the undergraduate level to put students on a research track, then continuing to support researchers throughout their careers
Alliance Participants
CRA-W
Computing Research Association Committee on the Status of Women
Focus on women in research
CDC
Coalition to Diversify Computing
Focus on underrepresented minorities in grad school and workforce
Multiple Points of Intervention
Undergraduates Think of grad school and research as a possibility Know how to apply to grad school Have credentials for acceptance to grad school Know how to obtain funding
Grad Students Persist in grad school Find a research area and project Do quality research Complete degree
Career Management Find a job Continue research Manage career
CRA-W and CDC Programs Covering the Research Pipeline
Alliance Activities
Discipline specific mentoring: Connect senior and junior researchers and graduate students within a specialty area to provide discipline specific mentoring and tutelage “best” journals and conferences, hot research areas networking skills and building collaborations
Undergraduate Mentoring: Coordinate and improve existing undergraduate programs (CREU, DMP, DRS)
Extended mentoring: Continue and build relationships after initial research experience Publish results, help with grad school application. Tri-mentoring: one student, two mentors – perhaps one academic and
one industry, or one at student’s home school and one at a research U. Distinguished Lectureship: fine-tuning the Lectureship Series to
focus on recruiting students, especially students from underrepresented groups, into grad school.
First Year Activities
Improve coordination between CRA-W and CDC “weekly” phone calls
Changes and coordination for mentoring programs Develop co-leadership for CREU Define an expanded DMP program for women and
minorities Institute changes in the mentoring programs
Hold first discipline specific workshop
Computer ArchitectureSummer Workshop Area selected because women are even more underrepresented
than in the field overall minority numbers are so low that area representation is meaningless
Workshop participation Held in Princeton, NJ, July 19-21 2006 45 attendees, most grad students or new PhDs or faculty 83% female, 27% underrepresented minority 22 presenters including very senior experts
Workshop content Technical sessions (e.g. What Computer Architects Should Know About
Compilers and Systems Software) Career / research process sessions (e.g. Communication Skills:
Presenting Research and Talking Informally About your Work) Networking opportunities, e.g. poster session, picnic dinner
Workshop Evaluation
Paper surveys to participants at end of workshop Online survey to presenters a few weeks after
workshop Because this was the first discipline-specific
activity and others are to follow, focus was strongly formative: what worked, what didn’t, recommendations for future organizers
General reaction highly positive, praised the discipline focus, the networking opportunities, and the level and variety of content
Future Plans for Workshops General Call for Proposals
First workshop pulled together in a short time after funding was confirmed, but topic had been decided and organizers were waiting
To continue, must identify additional disciplines and workshop leaders and develop a selection process
Significant interest from other disciplines Programming languages planned for May 2007 Operating Systems has a tentative proposal Machine learning held a lunch at AAI with our support
Because of interest, will pursue additional funding
Coordination Challenges Some overlap in existing CRA-W and CDC
programs Needs of women and minorities are similar in some ways
and different in others Need to balance goals and working methods of alliance
members Balancing activities that reach many students less
individually vs. few students more intensively Needs vary by environment
a minority student in a majority institution may need different support/encouragement than a student in a nurturing MSI or women’s small liberal arts school
Coordination Approaches
Regular teleconferencing between leaders of Alliance members
Gradual integration of existing programs, e.g. adding CDC representatives to the selection committees for undergraduate research programs that were previously all-women
Co-leadership of activities
Evaluation Challenges
Evaluate both individual activities and overall program
Plan evaluations to encourage cross-activity comparisonse.g. ask similar questions
Maintain ongoing evaluation of changing programse.g. add the extended mentoring aspect to the
existing Distributed Mentoring Program
Evaluation Approaches Continue evaluation approach we have used in the past
Immediate post-activity evaluations Long-term follow-up by tracking survey
Expand it to include new activities Mix of internal and external evaluation
Ask same questions across activities, when reasonable, to help comparisons
The question is not just “Does it work?” Try to answer “For whom does it work best?” or “Under what circumstances does it work best?”, or “What parts of the experience are key to it working?” Differences between women & minorities Differences between undergrads at large research universities and
smaller schools Participants at different points in their schooling Different aspects of the mentoring experience
Keep in mind the big picture while looking at the individual activities
Recommended