Citation
From Starting Point to Support System

Material Information

Title:
From Starting Point to Support System Experiences of Female Students' Involvement in an Engineering Living-Learning Program
Creator:
Haynes, Clifford
Place of Publication:
[Gainesville, Fla.]
Florida
Publisher:
University of Florida
Publication Date:
Language:
english
Physical Description:
1 online resource (183 p.)

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Doctorate ( Ph.D.)
Degree Grantor:
University of Florida
Degree Disciplines:
Higher Education Administration
Human Development and Organizational Studies in Education
Committee Chair:
CAMPBELL,DALE FRANKLIN
Committee Co-Chair:
ELDRIDGE,LINDA BURNEY
Committee Members:
KORO-LJUNGBERG,MIRKA ELINA
LINDNER,ANGELA S
Graduation Date:
8/9/2014

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Academic communities ( jstor )
College students ( jstor )
Colleges ( jstor )
Dormitories ( jstor )
Educational research ( jstor )
Engineering ( jstor )
Gender roles ( jstor )
Limited liability partnerships ( jstor )
Social interaction ( jstor )
Women ( jstor )
Human Development and Organizational Studies in Education -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
community -- education -- engineering -- hall -- living-learning -- metaphors -- residence -- stem -- women
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent) ( marcgt )
born-digital ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation
Higher Education Administration thesis, Ph.D.

Notes

Abstract:
The purpose of this study is to describe female students' experiences in an engineering living-learning program using a constructivist theoretical perspective. This study aims to fill existing gaps in LLP literature using qualitative methods. Data from 13 semi-structured individual interviews (7 initial interviews and 6 follow-up interviews) serve as the primary data source, and the theoretical framework uses Astin's (1984) theory of student involvement and Weidman's (1989) model of undergraduate socialization in unison. After conducting metaphorical analysis, I found five interpretive metaphors emerging: LLP as a Starting Point, LLP as a Neighborhood, Engineering Classes as Challenges, Different as Normal, and Female Engineers as a Support System. Conceptually speaking, metaphors related to Starting Point and Neighborhood focused on the LLP itself. Meanwhile, the metaphors related to Engineering Classes as Challenges and Different as Normal focused of the experiences of the women both inside and outside the LLP. While the final metaphor of Female Engineers as a Support System reflects the experiences of the women both inside and outside the LLP, the participants felt it was present in all aspects of their experience and served as the "common thread" connecting the other metaphors or one that "melded" their other experiences together. Reflected within these metaphors are three significant findings: the LLP creates a sense of community for participants regardless of level of their involvement, advantage-based metaphors are used to provide a positive description of women in engineering, and the LLP provides a residence hall environment that is supportive of STEM students regardless of gender. The findings reflect that involvement may look different for engineering students compared to other students: their social groups and academic groups may be one in the same. The findings also confirm the notion that women in engineering provide support for one another. The primary implications are that housing staff should enhance recruitment activities and invest in maintenance/renovation projects to develop separate locations for social activities and studying, while colleges of engineering should support the involvement of faculty within the LLP. Finally, both groups should work to enhance collaborative efforts by providing joint LLP events and mentoring opportunities. ( en )
General Note:
In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note:
Includes vita.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description:
Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description:
This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Thesis:
Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2014.
Local:
Adviser: CAMPBELL,DALE FRANKLIN.
Local:
Co-adviser: ELDRIDGE,LINDA BURNEY.
Electronic Access:
RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2016-08-31
Statement of Responsibility:
by Clifford Haynes.

Record Information

Source Institution:
UFRGP
Rights Management:
Applicable rights reserved.
Embargo Date:
8/31/2016
Resource Identifier:
969976946 ( OCLC )
Classification:
LD1780 2014 ( lcc )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

FROM STARTING POINT TO SUPPORT SYSTEM: EXPERIENCES OF FEMALE VOLVEMENT IN AN ENGINEERING LIVING LEARNING PROGRAM By CLIFFORD FORREST HAYNES A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2014

PAGE 2

© 2014 Clifford Forrest Haynes

PAGE 3

To my parents, V.H. and Leota Haynes, who always encouraged us to gain knowledge and find the answer when we did not know it. To other doctoral students , I hope that my journey will encourage you to persevere even when the bureaucracy of higher education gets in the way.

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Writing this dissertation has taught me a lot about myself, my abilities, and my determination . However, I have not done this doctoral journey alone . Throughout the years, I have had many people helping me along the way . Like the participants of my study, my thanks come in the form of a starting point, challenges, a neighborhood, difference as normal , and a support system. For a s tartin g p oint, this dissertation would not even exist were it not for the seven women who chose to respond to an email and then chose to trust me with their stories . Due to issues of confidentiality, I cannot personally mention your names here, but I am gratefu l nonetheless. My other starting point is my family . I must thank my family, especially my parents V.H. and Leota, my sister Audrey, my brother Brad, and my sister in law Leigh Ann, who provided notes of encouragement and pep talk phone calls . Though you will probably never read r support and belief in me is overwhelming . encouragement to continue learning and further pr oof of the value our family places on education. My committee provided me meaningful challenges that helped me grow as a student, a researcher, and a person . I would like to thank Dr. Dale Campbell for serving as my committee chair , for en couraging me to push myself , and for helping me navigate the bureaucracy. I am always appreciative of Dr. Mirka Koro Ljungberg for challenging m e to think creatively, to think critically, and to think outside the box . Dr. Linda Eldridge challenged me to view myself as a leader in the field of higher education, and Dr. Angela Lindner challenged me to keep moving forward and to make my research matter .

PAGE 5

5 The sense of community I felt within my borderless neighborhood helped me continue forward in my journey . I am grateful t o my large extended family of aunts, uncles, and cousins who were always encouraging of my pursuits and understanding of why I had to miss family gatherings . I am most especially proud to be a son of the Gillett, Arkansas community, where countless friend s, neighbors, and teachers told me how proud they were of me. My gratitude also extends to my neighborhood of student affairs friends and colleagues from my days at the University of Arkansas, Virginia Tech, Texas State, the University of Florida, and wit hin the SAACURH region who encouraged me . I must also recognize the University of Florida Division of Student Affairs James E. Scott fellowship, which aided in providing funds for research materials and travel to conferences for additional training on qua litative methods . I am thankful to any student who I have advised, supervised, or taugh t . You are great reminders of why I am in the field of student affairs . I would be remiss not to mention my NRHH crews of Victor Martinez, Alex Klein, Connie Lee, Pat rick Wanninkof, Raksha Ravikumar, Jacob Speedy, Nick Parr, Adam Lindsley, Jimmy McClellan, Lindsey Wuest, Vinnie Pierino, Aimee Dolan, Janine Monfries, Rachel Newsome, Katie Duguid, and Ivan Lizardi . I learned so much by working with you and by watching y ou grow and develop as amazing student leaders . Thank you for providing me that opportunity! As a part time doctoral student, feeling different from other graduate students is part of the experience . Luckily, I had some amazing colleagues to help me feel normal . I am grateful to Shari Lupton Crandall, Dr. Laura Waltrip, Dr. Zaria Malcolm, Dr. Jennifer Cortes , and Dr. Lyle McKinney for providing advice when I was just beginning in the higher education program. I am appreciative of the laughs and celebrat ions I experienced with my supportive current cohort

PAGE 6

6 of students of JoCynda Hudson, Dr. Jean Starobin, Dr. Tim Wilson, Kiwanis Burr, Dr. Maureen Miller, Mary C. Jordan, Beverly Cribbs, and Leslie Pendleton. I cannot go forward without also mentioning my o ther doctoral student cohort who I affectionately call One of the luckiest days was when I sat in the right corner of the classroom and unexpectedly fell into the group of Dr. Kristin Murphy, Dr. Elyse Hambacher, Desi Krell, Dr. A lexandra Lauterbach, Amy Martinelli, Jess Clawson, Dr. Lauren Tripp, Dr. Mary Anne Primack, Dr. Patricia Lopez Estrada, and Dr. Prisca . Each of you added to my experience immensely, and I appreciate d every moment. Finally, I must thank my unsung heroes wh o have served as my support system . It starts with Dr. DP Porter Roberts, who first offered me a job at UF and then became one of my greatest champions and supporters . I also must thank Dr. Kim Fugate Roberts for cheering me on from the sideline and Reid Roberts for making me good luck drawings . Thank you for letting me be part of your family! I am grateful to my UF housing colleagues of Jody Rogers, Orpha Hoover, Christine Winget, Dr. Yanmei Zhang, Rena Buchan, Sharon Blansett, Lisa Diekow , and Dr. Jon Coleman . Each of you gave me support, provided words of encouragement, was understanding when I needed to miss the occasional meeting or deadline, and was compassionate when I looked like a doctoral student zombie . I must also give a big thank yo u to Ron Anderson for his support in helping me through the bureaucracy to straighten out my research minor . With this group, I must also thank Dr. Art Sandeen for letting me teach beside him and mentoring me along the way . I learned so much just watching you in action! Last but not least is my cluster of friends . I am so grateful to JoCynda Hudson for all of her support as a study partner, as a work colleague, and as a friend . I also must thank Kelly Sullivan, Dustin Rollins, Dawn Sayer , Isaiah Sayer , Sherri Freedman, Alison Spannaus, Rachel

PAGE 7

7 Nelson, Jessica Inman, and Cat Cramp . Thank you for being flexible with your plans so that I could balance my academic life and actually have a resemblance of a social life . Thank you for the laughs over me als and for the fun times we had seeing movies together. For anyone else still reading this, if your name is not here, please know that it is not because I am ungrateful, it is because I am blessed with a large number of supporters and because I am forget ful.

PAGE 8

8 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 10 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 11 LIST OF TERM S ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 12 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 13 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 15 Purpose of the Study ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 21 Significance of the Study ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 22 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE ................................ ................................ ................................ . 25 Female Undergraduates in Engineering ................................ ................................ .................. 25 The Pipeline Metaphor ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 25 The Chilly Climate Metaphor ................................ ................................ .......................... 28 Course content ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 28 ................................ ................................ ......................... 29 Pe rsonalities of classmates ................................ ................................ ....................... 30 Support Programs for Women in Engineering ................................ ................................ 31 Benefits of Living Learning Programs ................................ ................................ ................... 36 Academic Benefits ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 36 Faculty St udent Interactions Benefits ................................ ................................ ............. 38 Peer Group and Social Benefits ................................ ................................ ....................... 40 Benefit Differences by Type of LLP ................................ ................................ ............... 41 Benefit Differences by Sex ................................ ................................ .............................. 42 Engineering Living Learning Programs ................................ ................................ .......... 43 Theoretical Framework ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 46 ................................ ................................ ............... 48 ................................ ........................ 49 3 METHODOLOGY ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 53 Methodology ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 54 Research Methods ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 57 Institutional Setting ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 57 Description of Participants ................................ ................................ .............................. 57 Data Collection ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 59

PAGE 9

9 Data Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 60 Goodness and Trustworthiness ................................ ................................ ............................... 63 Role of the Researcher ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 66 Researcher Subjectivity Statement ................................ ................................ ......................... 68 4 FI NDINGS ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 70 LLP as a Starting Point ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 71 LLP as a Neighborhood ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 74 Engine ering Classes as Challenges ................................ ................................ ......................... 81 Different as Normal ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 102 Female Engineers as Support System ................................ ................................ ................... 107 5 DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND CONCLUSIONS ................................ ................. 132 Relationship of the Results to Prior Research ................................ ................................ ...... 132 Significance of Findings ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 134 Implications for Theory ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 138 Implications for Practice ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 143 Ho using and residence life staff members ................................ ............................. 144 College of engineering faculty and staff members ................................ ................. 145 Groups involved in collaborative efforts ................................ ................................ 145 Implications for Research ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 147 Limitations of the Study ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 149 Conclusions ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 151 APPENDIX A IRB DOCUMENTATION ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 153 B RECRUITMENT EMAIL ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 156 C INTERVIEW PROTOCOL ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 157 D SAMP LE INFORMED CONSENT ................................ ................................ ..................... 159 E ................................ ................................ ... 160 REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 167 BIOGRAPHICAL SKE TCH ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 182

PAGE 10

10 LIST OF TABLES Table page 2 1 Selection Criteria for Theoretical Framework. ................................ ................................ .. 47 3 1 Examples of Possible Theoretical Perspectives Choices and the Implications for Methodology. ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 56 3 2 Demographical Summary of Participants. ................................ ................................ ......... 59 4 1 Data Table for LLP as a Starting Point Metaphor. ................................ ............................ 75 4 2 Data Table for LLP as a Neighborhood Metaphor. ................................ ........................... 82 4 3 Data Table for Engineering Classes as Challenges Metaphor. ................................ .......... 93 4 4 Data Table for Different as Normal Metaphor. ................................ ............................... 108 4 5 Data Table for Female Engineers as Support System Metaphor. ................................ .... 119 4 6 Data Table of Indicating Text Not Used in an Interpretive Metaphors. .......................... 125

PAGE 11

11 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 2 1 interact with one another. ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 49 2 2 ................................ . 50 4 1 Illustration of how the interpretive metaphors interact with one another. ......................... 71 5 1 Conceptual model of engineering student invo lvement. ................................ .................. 142

PAGE 12

12 LIST OF TERMS Co Curricular Activities A ctivities and interactions that occur outside of the formal classroom . The term co curricular activities is used in this study as an umbrella term for similar terms like extra curricular activities and out of class activities. Faculty A nyone with a primary academic or curricular related role . The term faculty is used in this study as an umbrella term for similar terms including professor, instructor, lecturer, teacher, teaching assistant (TA), or research assistant. First Year Student T he term for students within their first year of college . This term replaces exclusive language like freshman, which also are used to indicate academic levels that may not align with actual years of attendance. Residen ce Life Staff S tudent, graduate, and professional staff who work the housing and residence life department . These staff members are primarily live in staff members who are responsible for the day to day coordination of residence hall programs and community development . The phrase residence life staff is used in this study as an umbrella term for phrases like resident assistant (RA), peer mentor, gra duate hall director, residence director, and area coordinator. Living Learning Programs (LLP) A ny program that combines academic activities with the residence hall experience . Students generally apply to live together and are involved in some type of com mon curricular and/or cultural component associated with the community . The term LLP is used in this study as an umbrella term for similar terms like Living Learning Community, Residential College, Residential Living Community, and Theme Living. Retentio n M easure of whether students remain enrolled at the same institution to continue academic study . It may also be used to measure whether students remain enrolled in the same major/discipline at the same institution . The term retention is used in this stu dy in both ways and will be clarified as to whether it is discussing retention in higher education or retention in the STEM fields. STEM Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math . Science majors include the biological, chemical, and physical sciences, b ut the term STEM does not include the behavioral sciences. Upper Class Student T he term for students after their first year of college . This term indicates actual years of attendance in addition to the academic levels of sophomore, junior and senior.

PAGE 13

13 Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy FROM STARTING POINT TO SUPPORT SYSTEM: EXPERIENCES OF FEMALE INVOLVEMENT IN AN ENGINEERING LIVING LEARNING PROGRAM By Clifford Forrest Haynes August 2014 Chair: Dale F. Campbell Major: Higher Education Administration Minor: Research and Evaluation Methodology living learning program using a constructivist theoretical perspective . This study aims to fill existing gaps in LLP literature using qualitative methods. Data from 1 3 semi structured individual interviews (7 initial interviews and 6 follow up interviews) serve as the primary data source , and the theoretical framework use s Astin's (1984) theory of student involvement and ation in unison . After conducting metaphorical analysis, I found five interpretive metaphors emerging: LLP as a Starting Point, LLP as a Neighborhood, Engineering Classes as Challenges, Different as Normal, and Female Engineers as a Support System. Conceptually speaking, metaphors related to Starting Point and Neighborhood focused on the LLP itself. Meanwhile, the metaphors related to Engineering Classes as Challenges and Different as Normal focused of the experiences of the women both inside and ou tside the LLP. While the final metaphor of Female Engineers as a Support System reflect s the experiences of the women both inside and outside the LLP, the thread

PAGE 14

14 Reflected within these metaphors are three significant findings: the LLP creates a sense of community for participants regardless of level of their involvement , advant age based metaphors are used to provide a positive description of women in engineering, and the LLP provi d es a residence hall environment that is supportive of STEM students regardless of gender. The findings reflect that involvement may look different fo r engineering students compared to other students: their social groups and academic groups may be one in the same. The f indings also confirm the notion that women in engineering provide support for one another . The primary implications are that housing staff should enhance recruitment activities and invest in maintenance/renovation projects to develop separate locations for social activities and studying, while colleges of engineering should support the involvement of faculty within the LLP. Finally, bo th groups should work to enhance collaborative efforts by providing joint LLP events and mentoring opportunities.

PAGE 15

15 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The ever changing global market increasingly requires a technologically and scien tifically skilled workforce for nations to remain competitive in the global economy (Campbell, 2002) . In order to provide this skilled workforce, leaders from industry and government are calling for an increase in the number of graduates in the science, t echnology, interest in these majors has declined (Duderstadt, 2008) . Despite efforts to encourage more students to enter STEM fields, the percentage of students in tending to enroll in these majors has dropped over the last decade and remains around 20% (College Board, 2010). Even more concerning is the enrollment rate of women in the STEM fields . Women are entering college and earning more degrees than men earn, y et male students are twice as likely as degree in STEM fields (Baum, Ma, & Payea, 2010) . Because they represent over 50% of undergraduates but only 17.5 % of engineering students (National Science Foundation, 2011), al., 2009, p. 167). In order to address this disparity between the percentages of female undergraduat e students to female engineering students, it is important to understand why women are not seeking out engineering as a major . Unlike other majors, most students cannot choose to major in engineering overnight due to the sequential and linear nature of cl asses (George Jackson, 2011) . Overall, engineering students typically take more math and science classes in high school than non STEM students, and female engineering students are more likely to have had these courses than male engineering students have ( Yauch, 1999) . Once in college, female

PAGE 16

16 engineering students earn the same GPAs as male engineering students, yet women are more likely to judge themselves as less successful in their degree programs than men are (Meinholdt & Murray, 1999). Women chose to leave STEM fields because of experiences of uncomfortable classroom settings, and difficult interpersonal relationships (Johnson, 2011) . Models describing this phenomenon are often described as a pipeline or pathway; however, few retention models for engi neering students have been developed (Veenstra, Dey, & Herrin, 2009) . While the pipeline model to describe the pathway to engineering degrees is used for all students, the model for female engineering students has been characterized as a leaky pipeline (B lickenstaff, 2005) . In this model, the loss of students along the pipeline is seen as naturally occurring, and few, if any, According to Boyer (1987), one of the major challenges in delivering undergraduate education is the divide between academic affairs and student affairs (as cited in Schussler & Fierros, 2008) . To address the leaky pipeline phenomenon in engineering, institutions have developed partnerships between academic affairs and stud ent affairs to bridge the gap between class learning and their co curricular learning . In other words, Partnership programs enhance student engagement by encouraging campu s involvement, academic involvement, civic eng agement, and interaction s with peers and faculty . does while in college with what one gains from college (emphasis in original t ext, Nesheim, et al., 2007, p. 447). One example of an academic affairs student affairs partnership is a learning commu nity . Learning communities are designed for a cohort of students in common academic courses (Lenning & Ebbers, 1999) . These programs often include more frequent interactions with faculty members and access to additional support services like academic adv ising and tutoring . Learning communities are more effective in retaining students than less structured programs, but

PAGE 17

17 these programs often come at a higher cost (Johnson, 2000 2001) . However, these results are especially effective for poorly prepared or a t risk groups in making strides toward college completion. Engineering learning community participants report benefits gained that non participants did not . From a social standpoint, participants practiced team decision making skills and developed communi cation skills while working together on projects with fellow engineering students (Anthony, Palius, Maher, & Moghe, 2007) . From an academic standpoint, participants learned technical communication skills, gained confidence with design technology, and gain ed better understanding of the technical aspects and design process of a design project (Rutar & Mason, 2005) . Participants also earned a higher grade on the final project than non participants did. Another example of an academic affairs student affairs partnership is academic interactions within the residence halls . By design, residence halls encourage social interactions but have fewer academic interactions (Brandon, Hirt, & Cameron, 2008) . Effective ways to encourage these academic interactions is th rough hosting academic enrichment programs or faculty associates/faculty in residence programs . In describing his experience, Fitzpatrick (2011) notes that faculty looking to engage students outside the classroom must build relationships, and residence li fe staff have much to offer in regards to how students develop and grow . McCluskey Titus (2005) agrees that while students will benefit from academic affairs student affairs partnerships, housing staff will need to take the lead in initiating these opport unities. Residence halls have been a part of the American higher education system since colonial times . Thus, on campus residential students have always been a part of the American college

PAGE 18

18 and university system . In colonial times, colleges served as a wa y of controlling unruly boys, and the residence halls were one of the ways to accomplish this task . Parents gave complete . This provided a way for the institution to control hem from associating with the common layperson and disorderly people . This practice also allowed for an integrated program of curricular and extracurricular instruction (Cohen, 1998). At the beginning of the twentieth century, institutions became increasi ngly interested in student housing as women began entering higher education . Women were deemed to need separate facilities that provided close supervision . Student housing also became popular for students who wanted easier access to extracurricular activ ities provided by the institutions (Schuh, 1988). Since the end of World War II, the term residence hall has replaced dormitory , and coeducational halls have been introduced . Facilities have begun to be designed with amenities, recreational areas, and ser vice desks for more than only housing students, and the staff members has become professionalized (Fitzgerald, 1974) . The role of residence halls has now shifted d programs offered to the residents (Cohen, 1998). Research has long shown that there are positive effects of students living on campus versus commuting, and a myriad of studies exist that indicate this (viz., Pascarella, Terenzini, & Blimling, 1994; Schudde, 2011) . The sense of community developed through the sense of belonging, social activities, and relationships has a significant relationship with GPA and intellectual development for students living on campus (McCluskey Titus et al., 2002).

PAGE 19

19 While there are many benefits for students living in residence halls, there exists a slight difference in benefits by sex . The social support provided within residence halls has an impact being . Social support from friends was impor tant for preventing loneliness for women but not for men (Eshbaugh, 2008) . Additional support from romantic partners was important for both sexes, but the effect was greater for women . Curiously, those women who receive a high level of family support rep ort greater feelings of loneliness. When controlling for other variables, females living in residence halls had significantly higher GPAs than males living on campus (Zheng, Saunders, Shelley, & Whalen, 2002) . For both men and women living on campus, higher GPAs were associated with a higher high school rank, a greater satisfaction with their academic progress, and lower amount of loans/financial aid borrowed; however, additional predictors exist for women (Wang, Arboleda, Shelley, Whalen, 2003) . Wome n who are majority, senior status, prefer quiet study areas, and judge their hall to be on either end of the noise continuum were more likely to earn higher GPAs. The level of engagement is also a predictor of academic success, although the research is unc lear on the differences based on sex . One study found that women are significantly more likely to be engaged in the residence hall community (McCluskey Titus & Oliver, 2001) . This engagement includes developing relationships, participating in social acti vities, feeling a part of the community, and being intellectually stimulated . Additionally, this research shows that women engaged in the residence hall community earn a higher average GPA . However, another study found that men report higher rates of be ing involved in hall activities than women (Arboleda, Wang, Shelley, & Whalen, 2003), yet this involvement may also present itself in negative ways as men are associated with higher vandalism costs than women (Brown & Devlin, 2003).

PAGE 20

20 In a seminal work on th e educational role of housing, Riker and Decoster (1971) wrote thus enhances the learning process . The residential community becomes an integral part of the un . Thirty seven years later, researchers agree that the premises that environment influences behavior and learning is a total process has been and will continue to be foundational to efforts to enhance the educati (Palmer, Broido, & Campbell, 2008, p. 97). One programmatic example of how residence halls play an educational role to meet the learning programs . A living learning program (LL P) combines academic activities with the residence hall experience (Longerbeam, Inkelas, & Brower, 2007) . their lives, and to integrate their learning across the curriculum has led to the implementation of living learning programs at post Vogt, Longerbeam, & Owen , 2006, p. 40). Generally speaking, LLPs involve students who take at least one course together, who apply to live together, and who are involved in some type of common curricular and/or cultural component associated with the community . Compared to traditional residence halls, LLPs provide resi dents with a more intense and intentional connections between in class and out of class learning . They often have a larger staff and offer more frequent levels of interaction between residents, faculty members, and staff members (Hargrave, 2002; Jones, 20 03; Winston & Anchors, 1993).

PAGE 21

21 LLPs provide benefits for members of those communities when compared to students in a traditional hall . Students living in LLPs report greater connections to the institution (McKelfresh, 1980), as well as greater academic an d social involvement (Henry & Schein, 1998) . Students participating in LLPs are more likely to interact with faculty than non LLP students regardless of how involved in the LLP they are (Garrett & Zabriskie, 200 4 ) . However, the benefits that students may experience vary by the type of LLP in which the student is living (Clarke, Miser, & Roberts, 1988). There are a variety of models of LLPs including residential learning communities, residential colleges, faculty involvement programs, themed housing, and r esidential education programs (Johnson, 1996; Schoem, 2004) . In reviewing a first year experience LLP, Yaun (2010) found quality is improved when there are intentional opportunities to connect students to faculty, other students, the university, and campu s resources; when there is a sense of belonging and pride; and when there is an assessment plan in place . In describing a sustainability LLP, Whiteman (2009) noted, and creates connections among s According to recent statistics, 46% of LLPs have a reporting structure with an academic department or unit as part of the coordinating team either by itself or in partnership with the h ousing department (Soldner & Szelenyi, 2008) . Difficulty arises in tracking LLPs as no national database exists that can provide an exact number of each type of LLP that exist and no published statistics provide a description of the type of LLPs currently in place . Thus, little published literature exists on specific types of LLPs. Purpose of the Study Although students in LLPs report higher levels of satisfaction, a greater connection to the university, and higher levels of academic confidence, few stud ies have focused on the reasons

PAGE 22

22 this occurs . Campuses have used assessment methods that are unique to their institutional missions, reporting structures, and program goals . For instance, the University of Maryland and allowed individual LLPs to assess with methods appropriate for their departmental needs that included portfolios and essays (Stewart, 2008) . National studies using quantitative methods have also begun to emerge (viz., National Study of Living Learning Programs, EBI Benchmarking), but few studies using qualitative methodology have been employed. Engineering students are more likely to be involved in residence hall activities than students from other colleges (Arboleda, et al., 2003), yet few published studies have explored the experiences of students in an engine ering LLP (e.g., Shushok & Srir am, 2010; Thompson, Oakes, & Bodner, 2005) . Even fewer published articles explore the experiences of female students in an engineering LLP, and those that have been published employ quantitative methods (e.g., Pace, Witucki, & Blumreich, 2008; Szelenyi & Inkelas, 2011 ) . The present study is designe d to address the gap in the existing literature on LLPs by using qualitative methodology to describe the experiences of female students in an engineering LLP. Specifically, this study is designed to address the following research question: How do female p articipants describe their experience in an engineering living learning program ? Additionally, the study is designed to address the following research subquestions: Using their LLP experience as a lens: 1. how do participants describe their involvement in ac ademics? 2. how do participants describe their involvement with faculty? 3. how do participants describe their involvement with peers? Significance of the Study When controlling for other variables, females living in residence halls have significantly higher GP As than males living on campus (Zheng et al., 2002) . Women also gain benefits from

PAGE 23

23 the social support that the residence hall community provides (Eshbaugh, 2008) . Because women are significantly more likely to be engaged in the residence hall community ( McCluskey Titus & Oliver, 2001) and engineering students are more likely to be involved in residence hall activities than students from other academic majors (Arboleda et al., 2003), a study of women engineering students within a reside nce hall setting wil l explore an under studied population that research indicates is both highly involved in the residence hall community and likely to gain benefits from living on campus. As noted previously, women in engineering LLPs are a population that has not been widel y studied . Directors of women in engineering programs have found success in integrating assessment efforts early to enhance programmatic efforts (Marra & Bogue, 2004) . Because there is underrepresentation of women in STEM majors and because participation in a LLP appears to be related to success in the first year, it is important to understand what experiences students are having while a part of the LLP . This understanding may lead to the development of other programs and activities that can facilitate a nd enhance the positive experiences that encourage student success. In addition to gaining a better understanding of the population, this study will fill a gap in the existing research . Meaningful assessment is associated with effective academic affairs student affairs partnership programs (Whitt, et al., 2008) . While the number of LLPs has increased, assessment and evaluation is in the formative stages and has not kept pace with the increase (Inkelas, 2008) . There is a need to empirically test the outcomes of participation within LLPs. Effectiveness is a topic open for empirical study using a variety of methods (quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods) (Whitt, et al., 2008) . Earlier positivist studies have used

PAGE 24

24 quantitative methods to exam ine the benefits of LLP participation (Garrett & Zabriskie, 200 4 ; Longerbeam et al., 2007) . Even less research has focused on engineering LLPs specifically (Shushok & Sriram, 2010) . This study will use a constructionist approach to explore the experience s of women in engineering LLPs . This qualitative study may produce findings that will help institutions develop strategies and support services to enhance the experiences of engineering women in LLPs.

PAGE 25

25 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE Literature pertaining to the experiences of female engineering students who participate in a living learning program (LLP) is minimal . There is a robust body of literature addressing the experiences of female engineering students, and there are substantial amounts of literatur e related to the benefits of living learning programs . Existing literature is minimal on engineering LLPs, and the research does not address the experiences of women in an engineering LLP. To initially explore the experiences of women in an engineering L LP, an examination of the literature on the experiences of female undergraduates in engineering programs is necessary . This section is followed by an examination of research on the types of LLPs and the benefits of participating in them. The final sectio n includes a discussion of theoretical frameworks that shape the current research . The literature review is organized around these three major categories and their respective subtopics. Female Undergraduates in Engineering The literature on the experienc es of female undergraduates in engineering can be grouped into two categories . The first category is literature that focuses on the obstacles and barriers the women face . Within the obstacles and barriers, the two metaphors of the leaky pipeline and chil ly climate are used extensively to describe the negative experiences . The second category is literature that describes the support programs for women in engineering . This section is divided into those topics and subtopics. The Pipeline Metaphor Policy ma well as racial/ethnic minorities) as a significant category to address the scientific and technological needs of the country . These efforts evolved to address economic concern s, and in

PAGE 26

26 the 1980s, these changes created a powerful and useful model of the U.S. educational system for STEM in the pipeline metaphor (Lucena, 2000). liner process given the prerequisites that are required to advance in the sciences and remain in Jackson, 2011, p. 150), the pipeline metaphor served as a useful model to describe the STEM educational process . The pipeline metaph or explored the full educational system, starting as early as grade school through secondary school and ending with student earning their doctorate in STEM majors. The pipeline metaphor identified behaviors of demographic subsets that interrupted the flow of engineers in the pipeline . By pinpointing these behaviors, systematic, institutional, and personal fixes could be developed to address these leaks (Lucena, 2000) . For example, Kansas State University developed an early intervention program for middle school women to encourage participation in STEM by connecting school districts, university students, and corporations to the local community (Spears, Dyer, Franks, & Montelone, 2004) . Assessment of the program indicated that the girls noted strongest inte rest in opportunities to connect with women scientists and engineers, learn about career paths, and explore the type of work these current professionals do. In high school, one fix that can be addressed is to academically prepare women to enter the STEM pipeline . Women majoring in hard sciences were more likely to have higher high school math grades, higher SAT math scores, and have taken more math and science classes (Camp, Gi lleland, Pearson, & Putten, 2009) . More specifically, women entering engineering took more math and science classes than their non . The

PAGE 27

27 STEM courses with greater importance for women include chemistry, geometry, trigo nometry, precalculus, and calculus (Yauch, 2008). Once in college, retention efforts are key to student persistence . STEM attrition rates, for both men and women, decrease as time in colle ge increases (Daemple, 2003 2004) . W omen are more likel y than men are to switch majors earlier in the college careers , and women majoring in STEM majors are more likely to graduate from a different major than their original major than women majoring in other science based majors (i.e., agricultural/biological sciences or health sciences) (George Jackson, 2011; 201 4). Th is decline in retention rates of women majoring in STEM fields as they progress in their college careers has implications for earlier STEM i ntervention programs for women . While the pipeline me taphor has been useful in developing recruitment and retention programs, a criticism has been that it fails to address systematic concerns to assist those not in the pipeline . xtent to which we limit the participation of all our young people in science and mathematics and, more . Beginning in the 1990s, policymakers have called for a new metaphor to be created th at would address the flexibility needs for a global competitive market (Lucena, 2000) . Currently, no such metaphor has been created. The current technology age calls for an increase in college graduates, yet this is a noticeable gap in the American educat ional system to diversify the STEM fields, particularly for students of low economic status, for students of minority ethnic backgrounds, or for women (Campbell, 2002) . When a broader definition of STEM is used to include the agricultural, biological, and health sciences in addition to the physical sciences, computer sciences, and

PAGE 28

28 engineering, the retention rate of women in STEM is equal to men (George Jackson, 2011) . This broader definition also changes the narrative of minority women with African Americ an and Hispanic women persisting in a STEM degree equal to Asian and White women . However, this broader definition does not address some underlying issues in the educational system. The Chilly Climate Metaphor Most of the literature about female undergrad on the negative experiences or obstacles and barriers preventing success (Goldman, 2012) . 2004) fou nd that the chilly classroom leads to STEM attrition. disparaging remarks about women , as well women at a signifi . The top three teaching style, and the personalities of classmates (Schulze & Tomal, 2006). Co urse content In terms of course content, barrier courses, or key courses that students describe as challenging but are needed to major in a field, were seen as a major obstacle for student retention (Suresh, 2006 2007) . When it comes to barrier courses, students performed well when they Students who persisted in engineering regardless of their performance in barrier courses had one overwh elming commonality: the motivation to succeed (Suresh, 2006 2007) . These students persisted because they could not see giving up or switching majors as an option . They were also more likely to adjust study habits (e.g., complete homework or do more probl ems than

PAGE 29

29 assigned) and to develop the coping strategies of not blaming themselves . Instead, they determined what they did wrong and fixed it. The most cited personal obstacle and barrier of female engineering students is that they lack confidence in thei r abilities . While female engineering students earn equivalent GPAs and spend more time studying and preparing for class, they more often feel depressed about their academic performance and question their abilities more than their male counterparts do Callaghan & Jerger, 2006) . Compared to their male counterparts, women engineering students lack computing self efficacy but apply greater effort to compensate (Vogt, 2003). t eaching s tyle For engineering students, chilly climates are felt due to experiences of uncomfortable classroom settings that are often male dominated classrooms (Johnson, 2011) . These classes are typically large lecture classes with little interaction with peers and faculty or smaller lab courses taught by graduate teachi ng assistants (Bergvall, Sorby, & Worthen, 1994) . Instead, female students prefer smaller classrooms that include interaction with the professor and collaboration between classmates . While smaller classes are preferred, the benefit of larger classes is t hat they allow women to fade into the background . This reflects the feeling of tokenism, which is another institutional obstacle and barrier for female engineering students. In their qualitative study of classrooms, Salter and Persaud (2003) found that f aculty are the greatest factor to create an effective learning environment within the classroom . The impact of faculty interaction within the classroom had both positive and negative outcomes for women (Sax, Bryant, & Harper, 2005) . Women who challenged likely to consider gender specific careers and hold traditional views about the roles of women; however, this interaction had women report higher rates of feeling stressed and overwhelmed . When women felt that commen ts to faculty within the classroom were not taken seriously, the y

PAGE 30

30 reported declines in physical health, math ability, and degree aspirations and were more likely to consider traditional female occupations (like nursing or education). Contrary to these neg ative outcomes, when women received honest feedback about their abilities from faculty, they achieved higher grades, reported a higher drive to achieve, and reported an improved sense of health (Sax et al., 2009) . This data indicates that faculty have a l arge role in reducing the chilly climate of the classroom and providing a safe and equitable climate for women to succeed. A change in the current structure for faculty research/teaching expectations, in funding opportunities, and in the experiences of all students to engage in STEM learning opportunities is necessary for educational reform to occur on a national level (Daves, 2002) . In their mixed methods study, Wasburn and Miller (2004 2005) found that women in engineering called for male and female facu lty to be trained on the educational needs of women in male dominated classes . For instance, colleges could create teaching centers where faculty can learn pedagogical practices to improve education in STEM (Ramaley, 2002). Personalities of c lassmates Wh ile women seem to have reduced the gap in behavior and environmental factors affecting retention, Vogt (2003) suggests that the cumulative effects of the differences may account for subtle and unintended discrepancies from their male counterparts . For ins tance, in their qualitative study of a mino rity engineering program, Good et al. (2001 2002) found that students reported no issues of ethnicity bias, but that the females all noted gender discrimination . Similarly, Goldman (2012) found that while women a re more represented in STEM majors, the role of gender is still affecting their experiences. Landry (2002 . Female engine ering students

PAGE 31

31 oriented departments (Wao, Lee, & Borman, 2010) . Women in STEM majors are challenged to look the part of a STEM major to meet expectations and prove their worth . 2012, p. 129). Female students are a minority in engineering departments and face stereotypes or perceptions of favor itism and gender based advantages from their male counterparts (Heyman, Martyna, & Bhatia, 2002) . Women in engineering programs noted they faced challenges with men not wanting to work with them in group projects or assigning them clerical roles (Wasburn & Miller, 2004 2005) . confidence or competitive nature in class discussions. In a published review of literature on retention of women in higher education, a common finding was that women have specific needs to pe rsist in college and that universities need a better understanding of these needs to implement positive change (Landry, 2002 2003) . While negative experiences or obstacles and barriers preventing success (Goldman, 2012), some of the research highlights positive experiences of female undergraduates in engineering . The following section will discuss these experiences. Support Programs for Women in Engineering Direc tors of women in engineering programs noted that there were eight types of support programs: recruitment and retention, scholarships, mentoring, career development and exploration, study skills, social opportunities, support, and publicity ( Knight & Cunnin gham, 2004) . This section will describe some of those support programs.

PAGE 32

32 are (Camp et al., 2009) . Thus, merit based aid is a beneficial support program for women in engineering in terms of scholarship programs . For instance, the adoption of merit based aid programs in Florida and Georgia has increased the number of degrees earned, and this increase is greater for women th an men . Additionally, these programs increase the proportion of female students earning STEM degrees when compared to all degrees earned (Zhang, 2011). prevention, 2) ed ucation and awareness, 3) support and advocacy, 4) equity, and 5) 2003, pp. 5 6) . A supportive community of clas smates/friends is one of the most frequently identified support programs for women engineering students. The creation of support networks and more personalized interactions are positively correlated to retention of STEM students, particularly female and mi nority students (Daemple, 2003 2004) . Studying with friends and support from friends were cited in the top five personal professors, course load, what classes 2008, p. 106). Because women and minorities make up a smaller portion of engineering students, these group based activities can connect them to similar students . All members of a minority engineering program noted feeling connected and a part of the college of engineering earlier in their college careers than their non participant counterparts did (Good, Halpin, & Halpin, 2001 -

PAGE 33

33 2002) . The participants who were retained mentioned being more determined t o survive academic challenges . They were also more likely to seek multiple forms of help than those who were not retained. This determination to succeed is an important attribute that appears in multiple studies on successful women in engineering . For i nstance, some women in engineering turned a negative into a positive by seeing the small numbers of women as a personal challenge set for them to overcome (Wasburn & Miller, 2004 2005) . Similarly, high achieving women in an engineering retention program b enefited from cohort involvement, faculty interaction, informal study groups, and use of support programs . The key strategy to success was the conscious effort to find and use these multiple resources (Hyde & Gess Newsome, 1999). Successful female engine ering students took an actively engaged role in their academic coursework . They reported doing enough work to do well in class and rarely missing class (Wentling & Camacho, 2008) . When compared to male engineering students, females spent more time studyi ng and we re more likely to discuss grades and assignments with their instructors (Vogt, Hocevar, & Hagedorn, 2007; Zhao, Carini, & Kuh, 2005). Students who attended programs aimed at improving study skills also had a greater rate of success in STEM courses . Students who participated in supplemental instruction for STEM courses had higher course grades than non participants did (Peterfreund, Rath, Zenos, & Baylis, 2007 2008) . However, women in engineering program directors noted a lack of participation due to perceived bias or appearances of women students being underprepared if they make use of these study skill programs (Knight & Cunningham, 2004) . p. 16).

PAGE 34

34 Involvement in student organizations is another of the frequently identified institutional factors for success of female engineering students . Involvement in women in engineering type organizations was cited as a top institutional factor, and as Because women serve as leaders of these organization s, women are well integrated and empowered instead of feeling isolated and alienated (Tsui, 2010) . In one example, participants in a STEM based leadership program developed leadership skills through incidental learning, even when leadership training was n ot the primary reason for joining the program (Micari, Gould, & Lainez, 2010). To address the institutional obstacle and barrier of the lack of female role models in STEM, many institutions develop mentoring programs . When asked what activity they would keep if they could only keep one, directors of women in engineering programs mentioned mentoring due to its low cost, access to large numbers of students, and ability to build academic and social networks simultaneously (Knight & Cunningham, 2004). Women in STEM fields are underrepresented proportionally to those who earn doctoral degrees (Wachs & Nemiro, 2007) . The disproportion is even stronger at top research universities, where the percentage of female faculty is nine percent below the national averag e (Beutel & Nelson, 2005) . Women in engineering programs have called for a greater amount of women role models and mentors for current students (Wasburn & Miller, 2004 2005) . One effective way to enhance the number of female and minority role models is t o utilize graduate students and undergraduate peer mentors as teaching assistants (Stage and Kinzie, 2009).

PAGE 35

35 Mentoring programs encourage interactions between students that assist with the social and academic integration of engineering first year students (Meyers, Silliman, Gedde, & Ohland, 2010) . This approach suggests that peer interactions are an important component for student support. An additional type of mentoring program includes online communities . Online mentoring programs and communities match and can expand the network opportunities when in person communities are unavailable or small in number (like female engineers) (Kleinman, 2003; Single, Muller, Cunningham, Single, & Carlsen, 2005) . These co mmunities expand the networking opportunities by including high school students, college students, graduate students, faculty members, and working professionals (Wadia Fascetti & Leventman, 2000). While there are benefits of peer mentoring programs on fema le engineering students in terms of sense of community (Brainard & Ailes Sengers, 1994), the benefits of faculty mentor programs for female students connects to the academic success of the student . While women reported more frequent contact with faculty t han men did, there are differences in the outcomes of these interactions (Sax et al., 2005) t al., 2009) . Female students with faculty mentors were more likely to be satisfied with their engineering education and to feel socially integrated into the department than those without mentors, and female students with female faculty mentors were more likely to be committed to a career in engineering (Wallace & Haines, 2004) . Additionally, women who participated in research with faculty were more likely to be interested in scientific research careers (Sax et al., 2005) . This

PAGE 36

36 seems to suggest that acad emic involvement is an important aspect of retention for women in these fields. One programmatic example of higher education that bridges the gap between academic affairs and student affairs as a way to retain students is living learning programs . These p rograms have students live on campus in the residence halls, interact with peers, encourage faculty interaction, and engage students in academic departments (Inkelas, 2008) . The following section will focus on the research related to benefits of LLPs. Ben efits of Living Learning Programs LLPs provide benefits for members of those communities . These benefits can be categorized into three types: academic benefits, faculty student interaction benefits, and peer/social benefits . This section will briefly dis cuss each of these three types of benefits. Academic Benefits One of the most reported benefits is that students living in LLPs reported a greater connection to the institution and had a greater academic and social involvement than their non participant peers (Henry & Schein, 1998; Inkelas & Weisman, 2003; McKelfresh, 1980) . Another often cited benefit of living in a LLP is that student s report a smoother transition to college during their first year (Blackhurst, Akey, & Bobilya, 2003). Moreover, the LLP students noticed a more seamless learning connection between class and their co curricular activities (Wawrzynski, Jessup Anger, Stolz, Helman, & Beaulieu, 2009) . In this qualitative study, the students discusse d a scholarly environment that an LLP offer ed them . In terms of the physical environment, they discussed a community of learning due to more study locations within the residence hall hosting the LLP . The social environment also included students prioritizing studying and developing a peer expecta tion of academic involvement.

PAGE 37

37 Students carried these positive in class activities to the residence halls, as LLP students were more likely to have discussion on class topics outside of the classroom (Blackhurst et al., 2003) . Students in LLPs are more li kely to contact peers on academic work and engage in group projects (Domizi, 2008; Stassen, 2003) . These students also studied more hours than their non LLP counterparts studied and were more likely to perceive a positive academic environment in their res idence halls . They were also significantly more likely to use residence hall resources and were significantly more likely to discuss academic/career related issues or sociocultural issues with their peers (Inkelas et al., 2006). Due to their involvement i n LLPs, students participated in informal learning (Domizi, 2008) . For instance, while studying together, students notice d and adopt ed it if it proved successful . and the consequences of those behaviors, compared them to their own behaviors, and adjusted their behaviors as need . In short, their fellow LLP members provided a comparison group for which students can evaluate their own performance. In a qualitative stu dy of students in a LLP, Blackhurst, Akey, and Bobilya (2003) found that there were benefits for inside the classroom as well . While in class, students were more likely to sit in front, to ask questions in class, to answer questions posed by the faculty, and to contribute to in class discussions . Students in LLPs noted they were more likely to attend class due to group norms and peer pressure. Multiple studies have shown that involvement in LLPs result in higher GPAs than their non LLP counterparts (Edwa rds & McKelfresh, 2002; Stassen, 2003) . While all LLP participants had higher GPAs than non participants did , the impact was greater for male

PAGE 38

38 participants (Edwards & McKelfresh, 2002) . Additionally, the probability of persistence was higher for LLP parti cipants, but the LLP participation had a greater effect on non white students. Another benefit is related to retention . LLP students have higher retention rates from their first year to the second year in college . Those that withdrew were less likely to cite mandatory reasons to withdrawal (i.e., the institution no longer allowing them to return) and more likely to cite voluntary reasons to withdraw (e.g., transferring to another institution) (Stassen, 2003) . Additionally, students in LLPs are more like ly to return to the residence halls in their second year than non LLPs students, and this benefit was greater for non white students than for white students (Edwards & McKelfresh, 2002). One common concern about academic benefits gained from LLP participat ion is that students in LLPs often self select to live and participate in these communities . Two studies have shown that academic benefits occur, even when other variables are considered . Zheng, Saunders, Shelley, and Whalen (2002) found that when contro lling for self motivation, LLP membership remained a significant predictor of academic success . Similarly, Pasque and Murphy (2005) found that LLP participation was a significant predictor for academic achievement and intellectual engagement when controll ing for past academic achievement, socio economic status, demographics, and the interactions between demographics. Faculty Student Interactions Benefits Students in LLPs also felt that their interactions with faculty members outside of the classroom helped them see faculty members as caring about their students (Blackhurst et al., 2003) . In this qualitative study, the students noted that these out of class experiences demystified the faculty members into individuals and personally humanized them. Students also felt that LLPs promote meaningful and fulfilling relationships wit h faculty and staff (Wawrzynski et al., 2009) . Komarraju, Musulkin, and Bhattacharya (2010) noted that

PAGE 39

39 and available for frequent interactions outside the classroom are more likely to report being confident of their Another benefit is that students participating in LLPs are more likely to interact with faculty than non LLP students regardless of how involved in the LLP they are (Garrett & Zabriskie, 200 4 ) . LLPs typically offer programmatic opportunities to interact with faculty in formal and informal ways . Students who live in the LLP and are active participants in it are statistically more likely to interact with faculty those non participants or non LLP members . Interestingly, students who live in the LLP but do not participate still report significantly the y are more lik ely to interact with faculty than non LLP members do . participating students may see their peers developing mentor like relationships with faculty members through LLC participation and realize the value of such interactions" (p. 42). Facul ty involved in LLPs gain benefits too . Faculty noted that they received both personal and professional benefits from their involvement (Sriram, Shushok, Perkins, & Scales, 2011) and report receiving intrinsic benefits much more frequently than receiving e xtrinsic benefits (Haynes & Janosik, 2012) . Based on their involvement in LLPs, faculty reported getting to know students better (Golde & Pribbenow, 2000), gaining a sense of collegiality with other faculty and staff (Golde & Pribbenow, 2000; Hargrave, 20 02; Jessup Anger, Wawrzynski, & Yao, 2011), and enhancing their knowledge on pedagogical issues (Golde & Pribbenow, 2000). There is disagreement on the type of interaction that occurs between faculty and students in LLPs . In a national quantitative study, Inkelas et al. (2006) found that students in LLPs were more likely to develop mentoring relationships with faculty . However, in a yearlong qualitative study, Cox and Orehovec (2007) observed that most interaction between faculty and students in

PAGE 40

40 LLPs was disengagement, or little to no engagement and separation between the two groups, and the least observed type of interaction was mentoring . When interaction did occur outside of the classroom, it was incidental, or those interactions associated with genera l acknowledgements, greetings, and waves; however, the most often discussed type of interaction was functional or interactions designed to meet a specific purpose . Faculty note that time is an essential factor for community building (Ellett & Schmidt, 201 1), yet many faculty involved in LLPs note that a constraint on their involvement exist between managing their time to balance the requirements for tenure and their role as researcher (Jessup Anger et al., 2011; Kennedy, 2011). Peer Group and Social Benefi ts One of the first social benefits that students in LLPs receive is a genuine sense of community (Blackhurst et al., 2003) . Students in this qualitative study discussed how the community in the residence hall and in classes gave them an instant reference group and feelings of a place to belong . Domizi (2008) found that LLP students noted a social support that was available to discuss personal problems , while Spanierman et al. (2013) found that the activities that fostered this greater sense of community was making friend s from different backgrounds, studying with hallmate s , attending educational programs, and going on overnight trips. . Students in LLPs are also more likely to be involved in the residence hall community . Inkelas and Weisman (2003) found that LLP students were significantly more engaged in activities . LLP students also perceived the environments more positively and found the residence hall environment more supportive than students living in traditional halls. LLP students also gain an app reciation for diversity . Research on a civic engagement LLP finds that LLP students reported higher scores on a measure toward diversity and greater gains in these measures from the beginning of the academic year to the end, although neither of these diff erences were significant (Longerbeam & Sedlacek, 2006) . Through group projects,

PAGE 41

41 students gained experience working with students of diverse backgrounds and learned how to deal with those who are different from themselves (Domizi, 2008) . During this proce ss, LLP students also examined their own beliefs around such things as drinking and work ethic and began to solidify these beliefs to align with their personal values. Another social benefit is that students participating in LLPs participated less in negat ive drinking behaviors than those in non LLP halls . These behaviors included lower instances of binge drinking, reduced class absenteeism, lower instances of physical ailments (e.g., being hung over, loss of consciousness,), and reduction in property dama ge (Brower, Golde, & Allen, 2003) . Those that did drink experienced less negative impacts on self (e.g., missing class, getting sick) and were less likely to experience secondary effects of peers drinking (e.g., fights, noise disturbance) (Brower, 2008) . The greater sense of community that is fostered within LLPs provides an alternative to the communal bond through drinking . Community expectations are also established through social capital, peer accountability, and peer norms. Benefit Differences by Typ e of LLP There are many benefits for students living in LLPs when compared to a traditional hall; however, these benefits vary by type of LLP . Residence halls with one third to two thirds of the population being involved in a LLP reported having more posi tive diversity interactions than non LLPs. Residence halls with at least two thirds LLP population report more positive perceptions of social support than smaller LLP populations or non LLPs (Longerbeam et al., 2007). Compared to nonparticipants, LLP parti cipants were more likely to view the residence hall environment positively and more supportive (Inkelas & Weisman, 2003); however, the type of support differed by the type of LLP . Students in programs associated with academic departments or disciplines we re more likely to use study groups . Students in transition programs

PAGE 42

42 relied more on academic discussions with faculty members outside of the classroom, while students in honors programs discussed their academic concerns with peers outside of class. In a mi xed method study comparing four types of LLPs, Schussler and Fierros (2008) found no significant difference in level of competiveness, relationships with faculty, or sense of belonging . However, LLPs that focused on transition issues had a significantly h igher score on relationships with peers than academic LLPs, residential colleges, and low impact LLPs. The reporting structure of the LLP also has a possible effect on the type of benefits received by students . LLPs that have equal collaborative partnersh ips between academic affairs and student affairs were significantly more likely to perceive their residence hall environments more enriching and educational (Wawrzynski & Jessup Anger, 2010) . Students in these collaborative LLPs also reported greater acad emic interactions with their peers than those in LLPs with loosely defined or unequal partnerships between academic affairs and student affairs . However, there was no difference between the two types of LLPs in likelihood to interact with faculty. Benefit Differences by Sex In addition to variances in benefits received in different types of LLPs, there are also some differences in benefits received by men and women . In a national study, Inkelas et al. (2006) found that men were significantly more likely t han women to report gains in critical thinking skills, academic self confidence, and interpersonal self confidence from their involvement in an LLP . However, women were more likely to interact frequently with peers and had more positive perceptions of the residence halls and the campus racial climate . Women also reported significant differences in their application of knowledge to other contexts. Students in LLPs reported a higher sense of civic engagement than non LLP students, but this difference was s tatistically significant when comparing the sex of the students (Rowan -

PAGE 43

43 Kenyon, Soldner, & Inkelas, 2007) . Being a woman was a greater predictor of civic engagement than being a man was . This benefit becomes statistically significant if the engagement is within student government, a one time community service project, or an on going community service project. Engineering Living Learning Programs No national database exists that tracks and can provide a number for the exact number of how many engineering LLPs exist nationally; thus, an exact count of the number of engineering LLPs that exist across the country is unknown . Although no published sta tistics provide a description of the type of LLPs currently in place across the country, according to recent s tatistics, 46% of LLPs have an academic department or unit as part of the reporting structure that coordinates the LLP (Soldner & Szelenyi, 2008). Thus, little published literature exists on engineering LLPs. A large national study found that participation in an Kenyon, Inkelas, G arvey, & Robbins, 2011) . support systems and enhanced the quality of faculty interactions . Students who participated in LLPs report higher gains on these social cognitive factors when compared to students living in a traditional residence hall, and these gains influence factors related to vocational choice. Most of the literature examining STEM LLPs is descriptive in nature or is limited to research or assessment data on a single institution or single program . One such study used a survey to collect data on the experiences of students in one small engineering LLP (Shushok & Sriram, 2010). When compared to non LLP participants, those in the engineering LLP had statistically significant differenc es for meeting informally with a faculty member outside of

PAGE 44

44 class, discussing academic issues with a faculty member outside of class, working with other students to prepare for an academic assignment, and overall satisfaction with where they live. Another s tudy used interviews and qualitative thematic analysis to describe the experiences of students in an engineering LLP (Thompson et al., 2005). Students initially joined the LLP to make friends, and these students developed their friendships in the form of social groups and study groups. Additionally, the LLP students believed participation in the LLP enhanced their appreciation of diversity, generated motivation, and helped them receive better grades. Very few articles specifically mention women in enginee ring LLPs. Some of these articles only provide a general overview o f one specific program (Witucki, Pace, & Blumreich , 2008). The women in engineering LLP at Grand Valley State University was near classrooms and labs, and the hall itself was recently renovated with paint and science themed artwork. The renovations also created a tutoring center, a computer lab, and a faculty office. Programming occurring within the LLP included faculty lectures, tutoring, book clubs, and academic advising. Another pu blication discusses a women in engineering LLP at Rutgers University . This program included a graduate peer mentor and 2 required courses : one on leadership and the other on exploring engineering (Stiltz, Buettner, Kennedy, Zundl, & White, 2013) . After o ne year of involvement in the LLP, participants reported more confidence that they would complete the engineering curriculum, more confidence that they would graduate with their current major, and more confidence that they would succeed in an engineering c areer . However, the participants were less confident that they would earn their hoped for grades in the engineering, science, and math courses.

PAGE 45

45 Ramsey, Betz, and Sekaquaptewa (2013) explored the environmental aspects that make a living environment welcomi ng to women in STEM by comparing a STEM LLP to those who lived in a traditional hall . They found that women in the STEM LLP saw more messages about women in STEM, were more likely to wear or carry indicators of their major, and had more STEM role models . However, there were no significant differences in their perceptions of their living environment, suggesting that the residence hall is not the only location that these activities can be incorporated to create a welcoming environment for women in STEM. Onl y recently has literature appeared that publishes empirical research on the benefits of LLP do better academically than women not living in the LLP (Witucki et al., 2008). Women who participated in the engineering LLP had higher GPAs than all students in the similar majors did and higher retention rates than all fir st year students (Pace et al., 2008). Inkelas (2011) found several differences when comparing the benef its of women involved in a women only STEM LLP to a co ed STEM LLP . Women who participate in women only STEM LLPs were more likely to report a successful social transition and confidence in their STEM courses; however, women who participate in co ed STEM LLPs were more likely to report a successful academic transition to college . Additionally, Szelenyi and Inkelas (2011) found that women in single sex STEM LLPs were more likely to report plans to attend graduate school in a STEM field; however, these resu lts were lowe red if the women visited a work setting of a STEM professional as part of their participation in the LLP. While research indicates that women only STEM LLPs provide support in the academic setting, Szelenyi, Denson, and Inkelas (2013) found th at women reported greater gains on professional outcomes and expectations in coeducational STEM LLPs than single sex STEM

PAGE 46

46 LLPs . They noted that women in coeducational halls found their residence hall environment to be mo re academically supportive , report higher expectations for professional/career success , and report higher expectations of achieving balance between personal and professional life . The authors theorized that because the coed environment provides a glimpse of the future career climate in ter ms of gender without the consequence of the work environment, women are able to gain confidence and see themselves as professionally successful in the company of men. In summary, engineering LLPs exist at institutions across the nation, yet no national da tabase exists that tracks and can provide an exact number of how many exist nationally . Studies have focused on the benefits for students involved in LLPs, and a few studies have explored the outcomes of engineering LLPs . However, little research has focused on the experiences of female engineers in an engineering LLP . The present study addresses this gap in the literature. Theoretical Framework Based on the published literature on the experiences of women in engineering and the benefits of LLPs, I u sed the following criteria to select the theoretical framework for this study: ( a ) that the theory mentioned both the curricular and co curricular aspects of college, ( b ) that the theory be discusses the role of peer support, ( c ) that the theory mentioned the role of faculty members and instructors, ( d ) that the theory discusses the role of place of residency as an aspect of the theory, and ( e ) that the theory be inclusive of and/or based on research on women. Table 2 1 provides a chart of possible theories that were considered as theoretical frameworks for this study and their comparison to the selection criteria . Using these criteria , I determined two theories in unison provide d a framework for viewing women's experiences in an engineering LLP.

PAGE 47

47 Table 2 1 . Selection C riteria for T heoretical F ramework . Theory Curricular Aspects Co Curricular Aspects Role of Peer Support Role of Faculty Residency Inclusive of W omen Student Involvement Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Not Specifically Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, & Way of Knowing No No No No No Yes Boyer's Notion of Community Yes No Yes Yes No Not Specifically Ecology of Human Development No No No No No Not Specifically Development No No No No No Yes Student Engagement Yes Yes Yes Yes No Not Specifically Interactionist P erspective No No No No No Not Specifically Transition Theory No No No No No No t Specifically Student Departure Yes Yes No No No No t Specifically M odel of U ndergraduate S ocialization Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No t Specifically The first theory is Astin's (1984) theory of student involvement . Lenning and Ebbers (1999) indicated the applicability of using Astin's model to create and evaluate learning communities . ng the integration of social and academic lives within a college or university and its programs, and through quality 50).

PAGE 48

48 uate socialization . This model looks at how socializing influences and processes interact with the socialization outcomes . Because it looks at academic influences, social influences, and the interaction between the two, this model is highly applicable to a study of LLPs, which often have goals of bridging the gap between those two realms (Shushok, Arcelus, Finger, & Kidd, 2013) . The remaining portion of this section will briefly describe each of these theoretical models. y In an effort to describe the experience of college students in which students were seen as active participants in the learning process, Alexander Astin (1984) developed his student involvement theory . unt of physical and psychological energy that the student devote p. 518) . In this description, involvement is seen as an active term, and the academic experience captures both the curricular and co curricular activities assoc iated with higher education. The theory has five postulates which outline the foundation for the theory: (1) an investment of energy exists by the student, (2) there is a continuum of involvement levels, (3) involvement can be measured both quantitatively and qualitatively, (4) the outcomes of any program is directly related to the quality and quantity of student involvement, and (5) the effectiveness of any policy or program is related to the ability to increase student involvement (Astin, 1984) . In terms of this study, the second, third, and fourth postulates play important roles . Because involvement exists on a continuum, the experiences of women participating in the same LLP will likely differ from one another . The experiences of women participating i n the same LLP can be described through qualitative methods, and these measurements of outcomes

PAGE 49

4 9 In his original research, Astin (1984) found that living on campus was the most important f actor to high involvement levels . Students living on campus were more likely to be satisfied with their interactions with peer s and interactions with faculty than commuting students were . Further research finds that the three most important forms of involvement are involvement with academic work (i.e. completing homework, doing projects, attending class), involvement with faculty , and involvement with student peer groups (Astin, 1996) . Of these, the form of involvement that has the greatest impact fo r positive results is involvement with peer groups . Figure 2 1 illustrates how the three with one another . Figure 2 1 . Illustration of how the three main forms of interact with one another . noted three components of the socialization process as salient to college impact: (1) individual, group, and organizational sources of socializing influences, (2) social processes, and (3) outcomes resulting from the process . Weidman (1989) noted four socializing influences to the collegiate experience: Student Background Characteristics, Parental Socialization, Collegiate Experiences, and Non College Reference Groups . Figure 2 2 provides a visual of the interactions between the four socializing Academic Work Faculty Student Peer Groups Involvement

PAGE 50

50 Figure 2 Family Socialization Student Background Characteristics Collegiate Experiences Socialization Outcomes Non College Reference Groups Academic 1. Formal Curriculum 2. Faculty Members 3. Institutional Mission 4. Norms/Expectations of Major Department Social 1. Residence 2. Peer Groups 3. Student Organizations Normative Contexts 1. Interpersonal Interaction 2. Intrapersonal Processes 3. Social Integration 4. Academic Integration Socialization Processes Pre College Normative Pressure In College Normative Pressure

PAGE 51

51 The first socializing influence is Student Background Characteristics. This influence represents the pre college characteristics of students that the influence the higher education aspirations, and educational preferences. The next socializing influ ence is Parental Socialization. This influence represents direct student was raised and aspirations were given. To be more inclusive of families that include non family guardians, grandparents, and single parent homes, I will refer to this influence as Family Socialization. The third socializing influence is the Collegiate Experience, which has two normative contexts: academic and social. Sources of Academic N ormative Contexts deal with the curricular aspects of higher education. This includes the formal curriculum, faculty members, institutional mission, and the behavioral norms and expectations of academic departments. In contrast is the Social Normative Co ntexts, which focus on the role of co curricular learning and involvement in student organizations. These two contexts are assumed fluid and separated within the model by dotted lines. The final socializing influence is Non College Reference Groups. This influence represents people or groups who are outside of the collegiate environment. They may come from he institution. For married/partnered students, it may also rep resent their current household. Inherent within the model are the two forms of Normative Pressure: those that occur pre college and those that occur in college . Weidman saw these influences as linkages between the

PAGE 52

52 various socializing influences; however, he found them hard to measure and chose to represent them with dotted lines within the visual model. The fi nal component of the model is the Socialization Outcomes . These outcomes reflect th e literature on those outcomes considered important by higher education scholars, including occupational attainment and potential for societal contribution . These outcomes include, but are not limited to, career choices, lifestyle preferences, aspirations , and values. present study utilizes the socializing influences as part of the theoretical framework . Specifically, the Collegiate Experiences socializing influence is the focus of the present study. One of the goals of an LLP is to serve as a bridge between academic affairs and student affairs . Since the Collegiate Experiences socializing influence de scribes both the academic and the social normative contexts of higher education, it i s appropriately suited for a study of LLPs .

PAGE 53

53 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY In higher education and student affairs research, qualitative methodologies are employed to hear student voices more directly about their institutional environment (Perl & Noldon, 2000) . 43) . Qualitative research can provide insight into how students make meaning from their college experiences, their sense of belonging in educational environments, their personal growth and challenges, and the process of social mob ility (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007) . Pascarella (2006) states it this way, greater power to explain the why of casual relationships than quantitative approaches . Indeed, the v ery nature of qualitative approaches makes them more sensitive to the influential nuances of student academic and non academic experiences in college (pp. 515 516). Given the focus of qualitative research to understand the perspectives of participants in th eir natural setting (Hatch, 2002), qualitative research is particularly suited for gaining an Contrary to quantitative research, qualitative research does not begin with a null hypothes is and instead uses inductive data analysis looking for patterns in the specifics (Hatch, 2002) . Hatch (2002) listed additional characterizations of qualitative research to include (a) the researcher as the data gathering instrument, (b) extended firsthan d engagement, (c) an emphasis on the centrality of meaning, (d) sensitivity to wholeness and complexity, (e) subjectivity, (f) emergent design, and (g) reflexivity. Qualitative research encompasses many different methods of data collection, analysis, and reporting .

PAGE 54

54 goals . According to Bernard & Ryan (2010), there are four main goals of qualitative research: exploration, description, comparison, and testing models . This study will primarily focus on the description goal. LLP . In light of this research goal, this chapter describes the methodology used in the study . The chapter begins wit h a discussion of the research methodology, including a discussion of the epistemology and theoretical perspective that guide the study . Next, I will describe the research methods, including a description of participants, data collection methods, and data analysis methods . The chapter ends with a discussion of goodness and trustworthiness followed by a description of the researcher positionality and subjectivity statement. Prior to describing the methodological issues in the study, the following research questions are restated to contextualize the study in light of the epistemological and theoretical frameworks described . Specifically, this study is designed to address the following research question: How do female participants describe their experience i n an engineering living learning program ? Methodology An epistemology is the theory of knowledge embedded in the theoretical perspective and methodology, while a theoretical perspective is the philosophical stance that informs methodology and provides a context for the research (Crotty, 1998) . Epistemological awareness drives consideration for the theoretical perspective, which in turn has implications for the purpose of the study, the research question, and the data collection methods (Koro Ljungberg, Y endol paradigm assumptions; thus, the selection of quality criteria is determined by considering who hical position (Creswell &

PAGE 55

55 Miller, 2000) . Using Koro Ljungberg, Yendol Hoppey, Smith, and Hayes (2009) as a guide, Table 3 1 methods of this study by comparing four different the oretical perspectives. constructionism as the epistemological foundation for this study, while constructivism is the theoretical perspective to ground the research . Since a constructivist study is designed to explore how individuals experience their own world through their vantage points (Hatch, 2002), the theoretical persp ective. Constructionism is an epistemology that views knowledge as being constructed by human beings through interactions . Because this framework views knowledge as a construction of interactions, constructionism is a fitting epistemology to study how f emale engineering students describe their interactions within the LLP . Constructionism will shape and inform my study through the selection of interview questions that ask participants to describe and reflect upon different interactions that they have had through participation in the LLP. Using constructionism as my guiding epistemology, the theoretical perspective of this study is constructivism . Constructivism is a theoretical perspective that explores how individuals experience their own world through their vantage points and how their interactions with the world creates understanding and meaning (Hatch, 2002) . For constructivists, knowledge is not discovered . Instead, constructivists view knowledge as being created or mad e through experiences (Schwan dt, 1994). Individual versions of knowledge are created by interactions between the interpretable (the existing world in a specific time and location) and our system for interpreting it (symbols, cultural meanings, and language systems).

PAGE 56

56 Table 3 1. Examples of Possible Theoretical P erspectives Choices and the I mplications for M ethod ology. Constructivism Social Constructionism Phenomenology Feminism Purpose Statement The purpose of this study is to describe female an engineering LLP. The purpose of this study is to socially describe experiences in an engineering LLP. The purpose of this study is to describe the essence of being a female student in an engineering LLP. The purpose of this study is to investigate the inequities of female students experiences in engineering that create the need for an engineering LLP. Research Question How do female participants describe their experience in an engineering LLP? How do women living together in an enginee ring LLP describe their experience? What is the essence of being a female student living in an engineering LLP? What structures within engineering promote the need for an engineering LLP for women? Data Collection Methods Individual interviews, journals, photoelicitation Group interviews, focus groups Interviews Interviews, observations, journaling Main Knowledge Producer Participant Group of participants Participant Participant and researcher Role of the Researcher Detached Member of the group Detached Advocate and activist Possible Analysis Method Content analysis, narrative analysis Discourse analysis, conversation analysis Phenomenological analysis Narrative analysis, discourse analysis, content analysis

PAGE 57

57 Research Methods Before the research process beg an , approval for research of human subjects was sought . Each participant provided written consent in order to digitally record the interviews . To provide con fidentiality, participants w ere given pseudonyms, and identifying experiences w ere masked . A copy of the IRB documentation appears in Appendix A. Institutional Setting With assistance from housing administrators, I recruited study participants from an eng ineering LLP at a public land grant research extensive university in the southeast . The university has a total student enrollment of approximately 50,000, with 32,000 being undergraduate students . The college of engineering is one of the five oldest coll eges at the university and enrolls approximately 4,700 undergraduate students and 2,300 graduate students . It is the second largest college at the university, and four of its undergraduate programs are ranked within the top 20 in their fields. The residen ce hall that houses the engineering LLP opened in 1961 . It has a capacity of 210 residents and is coed by floor . The building is 51% female students and is 47% first year students (Blansett, 2010) . The engineering LLP opened in 2004 upon the request of engineering students who wanted to live near the college of engineering . In fall of 2008, the housing department added peer mentor staff to provide additional resources and support for the residents (J. D. Porter Roberts, personal communication, August 20 10). Description of Participants I used purposeful criterion sampling to identify my participants (Hatch, 2002) . Eligible p articipants were selected based on the following criteria: ( a ) be a fe male student, ( b ) have lived at least one semester in the

PAGE 58

58 engineering LLP, and ( c ) be currently enrolled as a student in the c ollege of e ngineering . As a financial incentive for participating, p articipants receive d a $20 gift card to either the b ookstore or dining services u pon completion of the first interview All eligible students ( n = 77) were invited by an email to participate in the study (Appendix B). To assist with the recruitment of participants, I elicited the assistance of administrators from the housing d epartment to contact the prospective students, and interested participants responded directly to me. In communication with the students, I acknowledged my role as a doctoral student and as a staff member within the housing d epartment. Confidentiality of responses was assured in the initial email invitation and in any subsequent communication with participants. Given the scarcity of this sample in the larger student population on campus and/or due to lack of interest in the sample population, the final number of participants included seven female students who were each given pseudonyms . When fewer participants a re involved in the study, more time should be spent with each one in order to sufficiently answer the research question (Hatch, 2002) . Upon analysis of the data collected in the 13 interviews (7 initial interviews and 6 follow up interviews) , I concluded that enough data had been collected to adequately answer the research question . D ata saturation in qualitative research occurs when no new information appears or no new categories emerge ( Morse, 1995 ) . Because the final number of participants fits within the original goal range of 6 15 participants and because data saturation occurred, I determined that no more additional participant recruitment was necessary. A demographical summary of the participants can be found in Table 3 2 . In order to maintain confidentiality, racial/ethnic identifiers are not listed within the table; however, the

PAGE 59

59 Table 3 2. Demographical Summary of Participants . Pseudonym Classification Major Number of Semesters Living in LLP Carrie Senior Electrical En gineering 4 Sharon Sophomore Mechanical Engineering 2 Marie Christine Sophomore Pre biomedical Engineering/ Electrical Engineering 2 Ruth Junior Industrial Engineering/ Computer Science 2 Lizzie Senior Materials Engineering 2 Bess Sophomore Chemical Engineering 2 Billie Senior Chemical Engineering 3 group represents at least one student each of White, Asian/Asian American, and Hispanic/Latina backgrounds. Data Collection The data for this study w as collected through semi structured interviews . The use of interviews allows the researcher to describe the experience of participants using their own words and experiences, while the semi structured interviews allow the researcher to begin with guiding qu estions yet follow leads and probe areas that arise during the interview (Hatch, 2002). experiences in the engineering LLP and their interactions with peers, faculty, and t he ir coursework . Some of the questions posed w ere , How would you describ e life in the engineering LLP? Because of your participation in the LLP, how connected do you feel to the c ollege of engineering? Describe an experience you have had with a faculty m ember because of you r participation in the LLP, and D escribe an experience you have had with other students because of your participation in the LLP .

PAGE 60

60 Prior to the end of the interview, participants w ere given the opportunity to add any additional comment s that they felt were helpful and relevant . A c opy of the protocol can be found in Appendix C . I conducted i nterviews in locations that were mutually agreed upon by the researcher and participant, such as residence hall lounges or library study rooms on t he university campus. These locations provide d quiet places to meet and freedom from distractions and interruptions. I obtained w ritten consent in order to digitally record the interviews (Appendix D ). Interviews last ed approximately 60 minutes and w ere transcribed in verbatim within one week of the interview. Following transcription, I verified all transcripts for accuracy. After I completed all of the first interviews, I performed my initial data analysis . I then contacted each of the participants for a second interview . During this follow up interview, I asked some follow up questions and asked each of the participants if there was anything from the first interview upon which they would like to expand or if there was anything they would like to ad d . I also presented my initial findings to each of the participants and allowed them to provide input on the findings and note if and how they agreed or disagreed with each of the initial metaphors. Only six of the participants completed a second intervi ew . The last participant, Billie, was away from the institution for the spring semester at an internship. Data Analysis In order for people to help make sense of complex information, they develop connections to mental models, or schemas, based on experie nces that are familiar to them (Bernard & Ryan, 2010) . Schemas come in three levels . The most pervasive schemas are universal, or those reflective of experiences common to all humanity . The mid range level is cultural schemas, or those held by a particu lar culture, population, or group . The last level is idiosyncratic, or those schemas held by individuals based on their unique life experiences.

PAGE 61

61 Schemas may take the shape of folk stories, life scripts, abbreviations, and metaphors (Bernard & Ryan, 2010) . For purposes of this study, I focus ed on metaphorical schemas . The study of metaphors is concerned with how people understand their experiences . It views language as a way to provide data that develops concepts and systems of understanding (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003) . In short, metaphors communicate the unknown in terms of the known (Moring, 2001) or the complex or abstract in terms of the ordinary (Kochis & Gillespie, 2006). ryday life, . . . the way we think, what we experience, and what we do every day is very much a matter . As a research tool, metaphors can provide a creative method to understand an experience . However, metaphors may only provide a part ial and personal view of truth/experience (Koro Ljungberg, 2001). To gain a description of female experience s in an engineering LLP, I employ ed a modified version of Systematic Metaphorical Analysis . This method was developed by Schmitt (2005) b ased on the work on Lakoff and Johnson (2003) by adding a step by step reconstruction of metaphorical models . I will d escribe each of the steps here and provide an example of that step from the current study . The first step is to identify metaphors and pe rform deconstructive segmentation of the text . This step is performed after the data collection process . More specifically, I review ed the texts of data and search for metaphorical phrases that are present in the data (Cameron et al., 2009) . I identif ie d metaphors in text using the concept created by Schmitt (2005 ) that includes if: A word or phrase, strictly speaking, can be understood beyond the literal meaning in the context; and the literal meaning stems from an area of sensoric or cult ural experienc e, (subject area), which, however, is transferred to a second, often abstract, area (target area) (p. 371).

PAGE 62

62 In practice, this is done by looking for words or phrases that compare two dissimilar things, for simile comparisons which start with words such as like or as (Carpenter, 2008), or for colloquial phrases that are used in their connotative sense instead of their denotative sense (Pitcher, 2013). In the present study , my review of the interview transcripts found 251 metaphorical phrases including opens up doors , rocky course , and like your sisters u sed by the participants . Some participants used more metaphors than others did, and this created fluctuations in the data and in the frequency of metaphors per participant. The next step was to synthesize any present metaphorical phrases into metaphorical c ateg ories . This step reduce d the large number of metaphorical phrases into a smaller number of metaphorical categories that are created by grouping models that describe the same target (Sc hmitt, 2005) . I assign ed each of the c oncepts with a metaphorical category labels. In the present study , I created 2 1 metaphorical category labels . For instance, I grouped the metaphorical phrases of extended family , home away from home , and like your s isters into the Because not all identified metaphorical phrases will help answer the research question or describe the same target as other identified metaphors, not all of the indicating data points w ere group e d into metaphorical categories. The final step wa s to combine the metaphorical c ategories into reconstructed interpretive metaphor s that can be used to describe the research topic . The researcher can use conventional metaphors, metaphors used routinely by the participants, or a creative metaphor that fits the cultural aspects of the participants to create this interpretive metaphor (Schmitt, 2005). In the present study in the data occurred, each interpretive metaphor has at least one indicating text from at least 5 of

PAGE 63

63 the participants, and most of the interpretive metaphors have at least one indicat ing text from each participant. Goodness and Trustworthiness When doing quantitative methods of inquiry, researchers are able to use the criteria of reliability and validity to determine the quality of the research . Reliability refers to the stableness and consistency of measures, while validity refers to the test interpretation matching the intended purpose (Creswell, 2011) . When doing qualitative methods of inquiry, the criteria of reliability and validity used for quantitative methods is less applica ble, and instead other criteria are applied. One of the earliest views of criteria for the quality of qualitative research is that of equivalency . In this view, qualitative research would have equivalents to reliability and validity . For instance, an o trustworthiness . In their categorization, the four criteria for quality in quantitative inquiry -internal validity, external validity, reliability, and objectivity -have the respective equi valents of credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. While the equivalent view provides considerations to differentiate between quantitative and qualitative research, there are several criticisms of this view . The equivalent view do es not take into consideration the epistemological or theoretical perspectives of the research; it can be argued that it places positivist standards on qualitative work (Altheide & Johnson, 1994) . While the criteria of the equivalent view does take into c onsideration the differences between quantitative and qualitative inquiry, the criteria places standards of rigor that do not seem to match the flexibility necessary to be used by the multiple paradigms associated with qualitative inquiry (Arminio & Hultgr een, 2002; Golafshani, 2003).

PAGE 64

64 An alternative view of criteria for the quality of qualitative research is that of qualitatively situated criteria. In this view, the criteria are situated in the study itself using the epistemology, theoretical perspective, and research methods as a guide (Koro Ljungberg, 2008) . Epistemological awareness drives consideration for the theoretical perspective, which in turn has implications for the purpose of the study, the research question, and the data collection methods (K oro Ljun gberg et al. , 2009) . Methods are chosen based in part on the researcher paradigm assumptions; thus, the selection of quality criteria is determined by considering who assesses the sition (Creswell & Miller, 2000). Because of my theoretical perspective of constructivism, my view of criteria for the quality of qualitative research aligns with the situated view; thus, I subscribe to the language of goodness for determining quality (Arm inio & Hultgren, 2002; Lincoln & Guba, 2000) . Within this language is the concern for trustworthiness and authenticity that focuses on the processes and outcomes of qualitative inquiry and not on the application of methods . During the analysis process, s teps were taken to maximize goodness so that the research is credible and representative of the participants (Arminio & Hultgreen, 2002). First, I ensure d that there wa s consistency of epistemology between the research question, data collection, and data a nalysis (Howe & Eisenhart, 1990, as cited in Jones, Torres, & Arminio, 2006) . This was done by stating my epistemological assumptions and theoretical stances in the study (Jones et al., 2006) . Following the discussion of my assumptions and stances, evide nce and a description of how the epistemology is maintained consistent throughout the study are provided (Arminio & Hultgren, 2002; Koro Ljungberg et al., 2009).

PAGE 65

65 Next, I engage d in peer review, which enabled me to strengthen my interpretations based on the comments that my peers provided about my preliminary findings . Peers who were not associated with the data collection process in any way w ere presented with the data . These peers w ere qualitative research colleagues and fellow graduate students who have taken qualitative research courses and have experience in conducting qualitative research and analysis . This peer review allow ed me to consider alternative interpretations and to determine if my interpretations were the most probable and reasonable concl usions to make (Golafshani, 2003). Additionally, I used respondent debriefing or member checking . Participants w ere given the opportunity to check interview data for accuracy and to comment on emerging interpretations that I identified from the interviews . If my interpretations have goodness, participants will be able to recognize their experience in my interpretations (Merriam, 2009) . For metaphorical analysis, this process is known as metaphor checking and serves as a form of triangulation (Armstrong, Davis, & Paulson, 2011) . During the first interview , I asked participants to clarify the meaning of a metaphor if the meaning seemed unclear to me during the interview . During the follow up interview, I presented the participants with my interpretive met aphors and allowed them to provide additional insight in relation to the metaphors and to comment on whether they agreed with the interpretation of the text and with the wording of the metaphor. In an effort to be transparent about my data analysis process , I provided an audit trail in the form of tables of indicating text and a reflexi vity journal to document my procedures and field notes (Lincoln & Guba, 1999) . This establishes credibility with readers by allowing them to serve as credibility auditors of my research process. In keeping with the constructivist theoretical perspective where individuals experience their own world through their vantage points (Hatch, 2002), the audit trail also allow the read ers to make their own interpretations of

PAGE 66

66 the data . In providing readers the opportunity to make their own interpretation s , I am highlighting the complexity of the decision making process when using metaphors as a linguistic with the research topic. Finally, I incorporate d the strategy of providing thick, rich descriptions to integrate goodness into research . Thick descriptions allow the reader to understand the context and use nterpretations (Cho & Trent, 2006) . With enough vivid detail, readers can understand the experience to make decisions about the applicability of the findings (Creswell & Miller, 2000). Role of the Researcher As a housing professional and student affairs researcher, my research often focuses on the students living in the residence hall communities on my campus . As a researcher/practitioner, both benefits and complications of insider research exist that can influence my research of my l communities . The benefits of insider research include ease of access to participants, ease of rapport building, and ease of understanding the research field (Chavez, 2008) . Participants may also have a higher level of trust with insider researchers and be willing to discuss more openly topics that they may not discuss with outside researchers (Corbin Dwyer & Buckle, 2009) . Finally, the flexibility provided to insider researchers based on their knowledge and enmeshment in the community can aid the resea rcher in research settings that are changing, unstable, or unsafe (Kacen & Chaitin, 2006). Researchers who take an insider position are able to use background knowledge to best interpret their findings . owledge of the . For inside researchers, the level of

PAGE 67

67 experiences to provide context and setting. Some of the complications of insider researcher include assumptions in entering the research field, bias in selecting participants, and potential power conflicts/relationships between researcher and participant (Chavez, 2008) . Ethical dilemmas arise that may influence protocol choice when information becomes available that conflicts with the dual role of researcher and practitioner . This is particularly challenging when the researcher responds to participants or analyzes data from a perspective other than tha t of researcher (Corbin Dwyer & Buckle, 2009; Jones, 2003) . Inside researchers also lose objectivity if the participants only provide information that they think the researcher wants to be told or do not discuss certain topics due to close relationships ( Padilla Goodman, 2010). As a language tool, metaphors allow for communication of ideas across cultural differences (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003) . However, this communication is only effective if the metaphor is relevant in historical references of both culture s . When conducting schema analysis, an important methodological skill is having an understanding of both the language and the culture of the people one is studying (Bernard & Ryan, 2010) . Not only is it necessary for researchers to have background knowle dge based on relevant literature, but the researcher also needs to understand any current metaphorical models that might exist surrounding the topic (Schmitt, 2005) . In this sense, the researcher serves as the interpretative force between the language of the participants and the language of the reader . Therefore, I believe the benefits of insider research outweigh the complications in order to perform a schematic metaphorical analysis of the experiences of female students in an engineering LLP.

PAGE 68

68 Researche r Subjectivity Statement In qualitative research, the role of the researcher is that of the instrument of inquiry and the tool of analysis (Stewart, 2010) . One way to assist the readers in understanding the relevance of the findings is to acknowledge the researcher subjectivity, including his personal beliefs, values, and possible biases that may shape the inquiry (Creswell & Miller, 2000) . This section will acknowledge my biases and situate my own background in regards to this study. As I interact with t he participants and the data, I bring my lens of an American white . During college, I completed and passed my required three science courses, three science labs, and two math courses . These ge neral education requirement courses were the extent of my STEM involvement . As a first year student , I was a member of a learning community but not a LLP . I lived on campus in residence halls for all four years and was an active member of the community . During graduate school, I served as a hall director for an all male hall at a technical university, which housed a large percentage of engineering students. Currently, I work for the housing d epartment in the o ffice that is responsible for the coordinatio n of the LLPs . Because of this role, I have an interest in LLPs, student involvement in the programs, and the outcomes of participation within these programs . Additionally, through my experience and role, I view LLPs as a positive experience for students and a worthwhile endeavor for universities to fund and provide. Because of my background, my research lens, and my inside researcher status, I may possess bias about participants or their stated experiences . A way to help combat this bias is to engage in self reflection using . Journaling offers an opportunity for the researcher to reflect on his biases, to reflect on what is occurring in the study, to record decisions

PAGE 69

69 made about the study, and to document his development as a quali tative researcher (Torres & Baxter Magolda, 2002) . M The knowledge and skills of the researcher can affect interview question selection, data analysis, and data interpretation (Stewart, 2010) . My competen ce to conduct this study was based largely on my experience as a researcher in graduate research methodology courses and reading relevant literature . I have experience with conducting individual interviews, which serve as the primary data collection metho d for this study . I also have conducted a metaphorical analysis before as a member of a research team that resulted in publication of the manuscript in a peer reviewed journal ( viz., H aynes et al., 2012) .

PAGE 70

70 CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS The purpose of this study is LLP by using qualitative methodology . Specifically, this study is designed to address the following research question: How do female participants describe their experience in an engineering living learning program ? Data from 13 semi structured individual interviews (7 initial interviews and 6 follow up interviews) serves as the primary data source used to understand the experiences of women living in an engineering LLP. After conducting metaphorical analysis, I found five interpretive metaphors emerging: LLP as a Starting Point, LLP as a Neighborhood, Engineering Classes as Challenges, Different as Normal, and Female Engineers as a Support System . Conceptually speaking, metaphors related to Starting Point and Neighborhood focused on the LLP itself . Meanwhile, the metaphors related to Engineering Classes as Challenges and Different as Normal focused of the experiences of the women both inside the LLP and outside the LLP . While the final metaphor of Female Engineers as a Support System reflect the experiences of the women both inside and outside the LLP, the participants felt it was present in all aspects of their experience and served as the together . Figure 4 1 represents a detailed illustration of how the interpretive metaphors interact with one another. The following sections will explore the context of each of these interpretive metaphors in m ore detail by providing an interpretation of the metaphor and present exemplars of indicating text . In an effort to be transparent about the data analysis process and provide an audit trail (Lincoln & Guba, 1999) , a table of data of indicating text for th at interpretive metaphor follows each discussion . In keeping with the constructivist theoretical perspective where individuals

PAGE 71

71 experience their own world through their vantage points (Hatch, 2002), the tables also allow the read ers to make their own inter pretations of the data . In providing readers the opportunity to make their own interpretation s , I am highlighting the complexity of the decision making process an topic. Figure 4 1 . Illustration of how the interpretive metaphors interact with one another . LLP as a Starting Point One metaphor in the data provides a description of experiences in the engineeri ng LLP through the conce pt of a starting point . Using one definition of starting point , the LLP as a Starting Point interpretive metaphor can be seen as a place where a journ e y begins or the first stage in a process or activity . This interpretive metaphor includes the categories of a threshold, a point of origin, or a lead off point . Metaphors used in this group reflect that the women saw the engineering LLP as one of the first places that they got involved with the c ollege of e ngineering and the university . It is here that they first met some of their classmates and where they learned about involvement opportunities. Female Engineers as a Support System LLP as a Starting Point LLP as a Neighborhood Engineering Classes as Challenges Different as Normal

PAGE 72

72 Several of the women noted that the engineering LLP was a threshold for knowledge on events within and informa tion about the c ollege of e ngineering . For the participants, the metaphors used in this context related to easy access to and first exposure to information . Sharon noted, o Lizzie agreed upon realizing the opportunities that were more readily available to her because of the engineering LLP . As she noted: I lived in [another hall] my first yea r, and living in [the engineering] hall my second year, it was more of when I realized kind of the urge of getting involved . I College of Engineering. Sharon went further on t o explain the importance of getting information on opportunities . Carrie summed it up nicely by stating that t he The participants' use of door metaphorical phrases reflects one of the most common seen thresholds and starting points into a location. Just as a door is an entry into a building, the participants see the LLP as their entry into being involved. The women also noted that the engineering LLP was a point of origin for them to find their first study groups and engineering friends . Bess described it using a metaphor related to plant growth . She noted, s are challenging, and you wanna seek out people Like a plant starts a s a small seed before it grows to a larger plant, Bess saw her community starting with a small group within the engineering LLP that grew into a larger group within the university and c ollege of engineering.

PAGE 73

73 Ruth concurred and explained how the engineering LLP helped connect the students to one another: Because the classes are so challe nging, leads to well, e. Ruth went further on to describe the engineering LLP in terms of as a foundational base on which to build future engineering experiences: Again, it depends on where your priorities lie. It just so happens with engineering, per demanding on its own, so it tends to be a huge priority for people and then not so much for other people. My number one priority ce. Even then, just being an engineer, you gotta have some sort of base in engineering because there are a million engineer organizations . That really helps out with that, too. For Ruth, the foundational base of the engineering LLP was one that she could build more experiences upon and one that she could rely on to be present and supportive. Finally, the women also noted that the engineering LLP was a lead off point for them . The women described experiences that gave them an advant age to succeeding in their course of study . Bess reflected on this experience when she moved to a different hall after her first year . She found that: pertain to mathemati or is there anyone Week going on, but community. As opposed to when I lived there, it was you would literally walk out your doors [inaudible] and people who are in those clubs. They would post it on a door, or post it on the bulletin board. In describing her experience, Sharon h all is not a s different as living in another hall, but it gives you more -

PAGE 74

74 most basic description of their experience . While this metaphor had the lea st amount of indicating text, it was one of the earliest metaphors to emerge during interviews, reflective journaling, and data analysis . Just as this metaphor reflects the introductory nature of the engineering LLP, it also reflects a lens that the parti cipants first used as a way to examine their living experience beyond the basic physiological needs of shelter and security to include a social and educational aspect to it . Table 4 1 displays the indicating text of data for the interpretive metaphor of t he LLP as a Starting Point LLP as a Neighborhood Another prominent metaphor in the data connects unknown to known through the concept of a neighborhood . Using one definition of neighborhood , the LLP as a Neighborhood interpretive metaphor can be seen as the people who live near each other or as a particular area. This interpretive metaphor includes three metaphorical categories. The first two categories of community and family reflected a positive interactive nature between the women living in the engineering LLP. The third categories of building reflected a less interactive nature and saw the neighborhood as living quarters and refuge. The first theme within the Neighborhood metaphor is that of community. Metaphor s used in this group reflect the interactive sense of community the women saw that the engineering LLP provided. Common phrases were the use of the word community and words describing interactions with other people. In many neighborhoods, there is often a location that serves as the meeting place and heart of the community. For the engineering LLP, that location was the floor lounge space. Bess our common roo m, see who was up to anything. Someone was always baking something; pretty

PAGE 75

75 Table 4 1. Data Table for LLP as a Starting Point Metaphor. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 63 Living in [the engineering] hall is not as different as living in another hall, but it gives you more -it maybe has an edge to it Sharon 925 927 LLC metaphor an edge lead off 64 Living in the engineering hall is like living in any other dorm, but with an edge Sharon 933 934 LLC metaphor an edge, any other lead off 67 They weren't like life changing or anything . I know they were helpful, too. Ruth 304 305 activities life changing lead off 71 I wouldn't say it was like groundbreaking help, but it was just help with your friends studying Ruth 430 432 study group groundbreaking lead off 106 They're more focused towards school and zen of studying, when you compare it [to another hall] Lizzie 68 69,71 72 life in LLC zen of studying lead off 4 like you're comfortable, you're in your own situation, and plus you're meeting the people that you'll be talking to for the next for years about your classes Carrie 96 98 life in LLC in your own situation point of origin 239 Again, it depends on where your priorities lie. It demanding, super demanding on its own, so it tends to be a huge priority for people and then not so much for other people. My number one priority is in God home base, and then there are girls who dance so some you gotta have some sort of base in engineering because there are a million engin eer organizations. That really helps out with that, too. Ruth 1432 1440 connection to COE home base point of origin

PAGE 76

76 Table 4 1. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 250 A lot of the classes are challenging, and you wanna seek out people who can help you. just grows and branches out from there. Bess 1157 1159 metaphor presentation grows and branches point of origin 5 it opens up doors Carrie 99 life in LLC opens up doors threshold 36 all you need to do is get your foot in the door for one club, and then you realize how many more opportunities there are Sharon 148 150 clubs foot in the door threshold 42 If I ever wanted to learn more about these opportunities, I would literally just go out of my door and look at flyers Sharon 298 299 connection to COE out of my door threshold

PAGE 77

77 Marie Christine agreed that those interactions added to the While not everyone participated in the neighborhood, the sense of community did not go unnoticed . Marie Christine seemed Marie Christine further went on to explain that she noticed the interactions but misse d the engineering component when she said, Similar to Marie Christine , Lizzie commented that she was not highly involved on the floor . However, she still was able to reflect on lasting effects of the sense of community that was developed by the staff and the residents. That sounds like what may be experienced. The people, especially the people managing [the engineering] hall. The programs that they made and stuff, they were designed to create that environment. You could see that it was designed for us to interact and make connections. It really was dependen t on you being able to go and participate and becoming involved in those. Yeah. were girls that would watch movies every night and hang out all the time. I can just imagine how close they are. the sense of community is present within the LLP regardless of how involved the partic ipants were in it. The next theme within the Neighborhood metaphor is that of family . For the participants, the metaphors used in this context described a deeper connection than the first theme of community . Common phrases were the use of the word home , family , and other words describing family ties.

PAGE 78

78 The description of the building as home was a common metaphor used by the women . Both Bess and Carrie becomes more than just a place to sleep . Billie can be like home, just like I said because of that openness . You feel more comfortable, and I like Because of the comfort level felt by the women with each other, they developed familial bonds through their interactions . Carrie noted that the day to day interactions lead to more personal interactions among the floor . She witnessed it when: You were spending every single day with the same 50 girls. You see them every day. You have to walk in the lounge to wash your dishes every day. They're there. You're never gonna get away from 'em, so they slowly become your neighbors and the people that you're constantly spending time with. Bess Carrie Bess While the sense of family was seen and felt, Carrie noted that it was not an automatic part of living in the engineering LLP . She noted that you had to participate in order to be a part of the family . As she put it: I mean, if you don't want to and you don't wanna be a part of the community, then you're not going to be. That's simple. If you live in a neighborhood and you never go meet your neighbors, you're never gonna be part of that community. This description matches that of Marie Christine and Lizzie who noted a sense of community present regardless of level of pa rticipation; however, those women who were move involved within the LLP described greater levels of positive relationships because of their involvement. While the first two themes of community and family fit the Neighborhood definition of the people who li ve within an area, the last theme describes the definition of location within an

PAGE 79

79 area. Contrasting the first two interactive themes is the last theme of building . Some of the women noted that the building itself was their place on campus; however, it did not mean that it was the main place they interacted or where they were most involved . Language used in this area of the metaphor described the physical building and/or the lack of interaction with other residents. Several of the women noted that the buil ding served the primary purpose of meeting basic physiological needs . Sharon used [the engineering] hall just as my place to come back, drop my stuff off, eat something, and go on to my next thing, or come home and Ruth agreed that s Sharon and Ruth describe the LLP as a place that offered them security and a place to transition between activities, but they did not see it as their main location to interact with other women in engineering or a place where they developed deep friendships. While Billie commented that she was involved in the floor, she also noted that there were Bess also noticed that some of the other residents used it as a place of refuge . She described it by saying: There were also people who were a lot more introverted. They stayed inside their who wer interact. They were done with classes. They needed to recharge and refuel, and the way they do that is by having some alone time. For some people it was a place to stay. For some people it was a place to go have fun. lock myself in a h ole and recharge and refuel describes the dichotomy of the Neighborhood. It is at times both a place of interaction and belonging and also a place of res t and refuge . These descriptions are not mutually exclusive; how the women perceive the LLP depends on their needs at that given moment.

PAGE 80

80 One aspect of the neighborhood that was present within each of the three themes was the role of the building layout an . Many of the women noted that location of your room in the physical layout of the hall sometimes influenced the level of involvement in the Neighborhood . As Carrie p Carrie added that the women hanging out in the lounge were likely to engage other residents as well. As she noted: It's like they bring in people even th e people on the outskirts of the floor. The people that live on the edges tend not to be a group a part of the group in the middle. Like when you live closer to the lounge, you hear people yelling or laughing, so you come out and talk to them. Carrie a lso realized that the interactions extended beyond the social. For her, the social aspects blended into her academic life. As she put it: I'll walk in there and everyone'll be up and doin' homework. You walk in there and people are askin' people questio ns on how to do a certain math question or can because they're doing general ed classes. It's like a community in the lounge a lot of times. You'll have like 10 people sitting around the table in the lounge talking about homework. Then you go to class, you see them in class, you sit with them in class. The building is shaped so that each floor has two wings with the lounge and bathroom in the middle, and each end of the hall has a stairwell. This layout causes it where the women in each wing may not i nteract that often with the other wing since they do not have to walk by every room in order to access the stairs. Ruth described how this setup created an interesting dynamic between the two wings of her floor: We got nicknamed the Dark Side because for some reason all the other girls on the other side of the hall were really, really good friends with each other. My room was the very first one before the Dark Side, so me and my room were still cool. It eal. I could still talk to those girls, and we were all friendly.

PAGE 81

81 On an individual level, Ruth The interpretive m etaphor of the LLP as a Neighborhood describes the interactive nature of the LLP . For some of the women, this neighborhood provides an interaction that they see as a positive aspect and something with which they were highly involved . This interactive con text of the metaphor can be seen in the first two themes of community and family . However, other women saw the neighborhood as more of a place that met physiological needs, which is reflected within the theme of building . These women may have noted the i nteractive nature of the Neighborhood but chose not to be active participants . Table 4 2 displays the indicating text of data for the interpretive metaphor of the LLP as a Neighborhood. Engineering Classes as Challenges The third interpretive metaphor from the data provides a description of experiences in the engineering LLP through the conce pt of various challenges . Using one definition of challenges, the Engineering Classes as Challenges interpretive metaphor can be seen as a something that by its nature requires special effort or skill . This metaphor reflects the difficulty level of the classes the women are taking . This interpretive metaphor includes the four categories of engineering as a path, classes as obstacles, engineering as business, and engineering/classes as competition . The first two themes of path and obstacles reflect how the women viewed the coursework, while the other two themes of b usiness and competition reflect how t he women view their interactions with the coursework and the skills in which they use to overcome the challenges. The first theme within the Challenges metaphor is that of path. Metaphors used in this theme reflect a college career trajectory that the wom en have set for themselves. Common phrases were the use of the word path and words describing distance or movement.

PAGE 82

82 Table 4 2. Data Table for LLP as a Neighborhood Metaphor. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metapho r Text Metaphorical Category 1 like any other hall Carrie 50 life in LLC any other hall hall as building 2 like any other hall life Carrie 54 life in LLC any other hall hall as building 33 It's just like any other dorm, really. Sharon 55 life in LLC any other dorm hall as building 34 it's just like a typical freshman dorm to me Sharon 59 60 life in LLC typical hall as building 35 I guess I used [the engineering] hall just as my place to come back, drop my stuff off, eat something, and go on to my next thing, or come home and sleep Sharon 71 74 life in LLC my place hall as building 65 We got nicknames the Dark Side because for some reason all the other girls on the other side of the hall were really, really good friends with each other Ruth 82 84 life i n LLC Dark Side hall as building 66 Then the girls who would just walk past you without saying hi. For some reason, they all tend to live on the Dark Side of the hall. Ruth 133 135 life in LLC Dark Side hall as building 82 Living in [the engineering] hall is like living in exactly what you would expect from your first year at college, I guess. Ruth 903 904 LLC metaphor like what you'd expect hall as building 167 I lock myself in a hole far away from everybody and study. Billie 240 241 balancing roles in a hole hall as building 233 I guess my friends' base was more out of [the engineering] hall, like people I met outside of [the engineering] hall, than inside, not because I didn't like the girls I knew or certain things like that, but I don't know . That's just where I found -my home base was outside Ruth 1066 1070 life in LLC home base hall as building 234 I would go there to sleep, eat, hang out with my roommates. Ruth 1075 1076 life in LLC hang out hall as building

PAGE 83

83 Table 4 2. Continued . Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 246 There were also people who were a lot more introverted. They stayed inside their own rooms. They did not necessarily take advantage, I want to say, of all the people who were outside, but that was just who they were. They did not feel the need to interact. They were done with classes. They needed to recharge and refuel, and the way they do that is by havi ng some alone time. For some people it was a place to stay. For some people it was a place to go have fun. Bess 1013 1020 life in LLC recharge and refuel hall as building 3 like a community in the lounge a lot of times Carrie 63 64 typical week community LLC as community 6 like they bring in people even the people on the outskirts of the floors Carrie 133 programs outskirts LLC as community 31 Those are usually the outskirts; those are the people that live on the outskirts Carrie 479 480 life in LLC outskirts LLC as community 88 Well, it was very much a community. Not necessarily an engineering community, but it was a community. Marie Christine 83 84 life in LLC community LLC as community 92 The most I can say that the activities provided was a sense of community. Marie Christine 283 284 activities sense of community LLC as community 99 It was always very nice, very casual. I mean, it things to do also, so. Marie Christine 717 719 life in LLC very deep LLC as community

PAGE 84

84 Table 4 2. Continued . Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 127 was always out in our main rec room area, common room. Bess 55 58 life in LLC stereotypical engineer LLC as community 128 who was up to anything. Someone was always baking something; pretty sure how I gained my freshman 15. Bess 71 73 life in LLC up to LLC as community 129 Bess 73 74 life in LLC hang out LLC as community 136 Bess 345 346 studying hang out LLC as community 158 Billie 70 71 life in LLC open LLC as community 161 the hallway, people will just sit there and talk like I said open is another word you can say. Billie 192 194 life in LLC open LLC as community 162 You just free Billie 194 195 life in LLC free LLC as community 163 hanging out, just doing girly things or talking an open community Billie 206 208 life in LLC chill, hanging out, open community LLC as community 202 You can't just sit at the end of a hallway and . . . Expect people to come and drag you into the lounge Carrie 649 650, 654 life in LLC drag you LLC as community

PAGE 85

85 Table 4 2. Continued . Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 224 The other girls definitely seem e d to have a much closer bond, because they were there more often. Marie Christine 1226 1228 life in LLC bond LLC as community 24 [the engineering] hall is sort of like an extended family Carrie 368 LLC metaphor extended family LLC as family 32 We're just an extended family, you'll know 'em forever Carrie 507 508 life in LLC extended family LLC as family 148 Is like having a home away from home . Bess 672 LLC metaphor home away from home LLC as family 149 You had a family there. Bess 672 LLC metaphor family LLC as family 151 Girls that lived on your floor were like your sisters. Bess 673 674 LLC metaphor sisters LLC as family 187 It can be like home, just like I said because of that openness. You feel more comfortable, and I like that. Billie 752 753 LLC metaphor home LLC as family 198 You were spending every single day with the same 50 girls. You see them every day. You have to walk in the lounge to wash your dishes every day. They're there. You're never gonna get away from 'em, so they slowly become your neighbors and the people th at you're constantly spending time with. Carrie 614 618 life in LLC neighbors LLC as family 199 it just becomes like a home. It's like a second home away from home. Carrie 619 620 life in LLC home away from home LLC as family 200 At least my floor, it's like the center people, the people closest to the lounge, are the ones that join in and become part of the family. Carrie 629 631 life in LLC family LLC as family

PAGE 86

86 Table 4 2. Continued . Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 201 I mean, if you don't want to and you don't wanna be a part of the community, then you're not going to be. That's simple. If you live in a neighborhood and you never go meet your neighbors, you're never gonna be part of that community. Carrie 633 637 li fe in LLC neighborhood LLC as family

PAGE 87

87 A path represents a route along which something moves. Some of the women used the path language to describe the progress made within their classes. In this sense, the teacher serves as a guide leading a group of students along the path; however, not ever yone was able to stay with the group at all times. Marie Christine the time going over the same concepts trying to make sure that ever ybody understands, but in doing don't know -the students don't know if they're moving on to a new topic, or staying on the same Others use the metaphorical language of path to describe the larger course of their college Ruth was the most frequent user of this language, and she used it most frequently when discussing her reasons to change majors. She Ruth realized that she had made the right choice to change paths because she was enjoying classes again. She realized that Despite the potential challenges the women will face on the engineering path, they still plan to Bess describes it by saying That we love what we do. We know that this is a super hard major. If it was super easy, everyone would be doing it. That most of us are really good at what we do, and that lot of our gender, which is really hard if you want to find people to live with. Mom is not gonna be okay with me living with a bunch of guys. That despite all the challenges wouldn't change my major, ever. Bess she accepts the obstacles as a natural part of her journey .

PAGE 88

88 Closely related to the path theme is the next theme of obstacles. For the participants, the metaphors used in this context described types of obstacles that the women overcome. Metaphorical phrases used here reflect obstacles like rocky courses , trippi ng , and drowning which indicate that these courses did not provide an easy path to follow. The first description of obstacles came in the form of some of the earliest classes the women had to take for their engineering major . Carrie noted that these cours you know . While she had some of the most colorful descriptions of these courses, Carrie went further to explain what made these classes so challe nging . and do it every night and work on it, then you're not gonna make it. That's what they call a weed Sharon agreed with Carrie obstacles . they're the rocky courses is because it is your first semeste Others also agreed that the classes and the lifestyle of being an engineering student provided obstacles that were tough to face . Ruth you gotta get an internship. You gotta get a co Carrie agreed that the feeling of being o verwhelmed We're not gonna make it. There's no more for us to do. Definitely it's really hard to get

PAGE 89

89 Regardless of how overwhelmed they felt, the women found a coping mechanism to help them over come the obstacles, and that mechanism was relying on each other . Ruth had solace in e . . It actually really did make me Bess agreed that Carrie echoed the sentiment in the power of having others face the obstacles with her . -when they sit down next to you and you realize tha t they understand the information and so they can help you While the first two themes within the Challenges metaphor focus on how the women describe their classes and life as an engineer, the next two themes describe strategies the women use t o overcome these challenges . The third theme within the Challenges metaphor is that of business . This theme that the women saw classes as serious work . They mentioned getting down to work or getting serious in order to do well in classes. One of the mos t common phrases related to work and busines s used to describe a strategy to overcome the challenges of engineering was buckle down . When asked to define what this phrase meant, Bess Others agreed that buckling down was key to succeeding . Marie Christine noted that kle down they will seem much easier . It's Sharon

PAGE 90

90 Sharon they get down to busin Carrie Sharon noted the positive side of doing Because of this need to work hard, Billie noted the benefit of the engineering LLP . The final theme within the Challenges metaphor is th at of competition . For the participants, the metaphors used in this context reflect that the women saw classes as a sport/competition; however, the competition was not with other students but with the courses themselves . In order to be successful, the wo men had to learn to compete against and fight with the coursework . Language in this theme reflected races, sports, or fights. A common way of describing the competition was that of a race . Carrie described the need to keep the pace with the rest of the c lass, Because if you don't stay on top of what they give you every week, then you essentially fall behind in the work and it's really hard to catch up back to the point that the professor is at because he continues to teach. Carrie expanded on a strategy in which to stay in the race . have to learn to schedule your time properly or you'll fall behind in your classes, or you'll fall Much of the language used withi n this theme revolved around a variety of sports terminology . One of the most vivid descriptions comes from Bess who compared learning how to compete in engineering classes with learning how to swim . As she put it, board, and you have to just dive in. You either

PAGE 91

91 it up to the surface with the amount of air you have left. Just as time, patience, and practice are needed to excel in sports, so it is with excelling in engineering . Lizzie a very easy ti me grasping some concepts. I would need a little more time to grasp those concepts or Billie noticed that the faculty were there as part of the sport of engineering . She realized that they coul d both make the subject challenging and also provide assistance at the same time . professors that are also really committed, but they understand that so when they throw a curve, While the competition theme was used by many of the participants, Carrie was by far the most frequent provider of language within this theme . As a self p Carrie Carrie to contend w one Bess ace really Several of the women noted the role the engineering LLP played in helping them face the competition that is engine ering . For Carrie , it was knowing that she was not alone in this

PAGE 92

92 competition . She realized she gained strength and confidence from her fellow competitors who lived in the hall with her when she described the following account: If you felt alone in your classes, wouldn't that drag you down? You would just feel bad. Not feel, but your psyche wouldn't be as strong because you just feel alone. That's why I think the engineering hall really helps. Lizzie agreed that she gained a sense of teamwork and toge therness from the other female engineers in her hall . Overall, Lizzie connected all of the themes of the Classes as Challenges metaphor together when she described one of her toughest times in college . She noted that am I gonna stick with this major or am I gonna go to another engineering or maybe like our goal is aligned. For her, the classes provided obstacles that potentially blocked her path, but the engineering LLP provided her with fellow combatants to face the competition together and do the work necessary to succeed . The interpretive metaphor of the Engineering Classes as Ch allenges describes the level of difficulty of the classes the women are taking . While the classes were hard and there were obstacles to overcome, the women saw this as a normal part of the engineering path . While most of the women were able to overcome t he obstacles, some decided to change path or try a new direction . Regardless of what they chose to do, each of the women found strategies to help them achieve their goals . For some this meant working hard, while others found strength in a sense of teamwo rk with the other women of the engineering LLP to help them compete in engineering . Table 4 3 displays the indicating text of data for the interpretive metaphor of Engineering Classes as Challenges.

PAGE 93

93 Table 4 3. Data Table for Engineering Classes as Challenges Metaphor. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 44 Those classes are a little more challenging, just because they get down to business when you take those classes Sharon 409 411 classes down to business classes as business 52 Once you buckle down, it becomes a little easier Sharon 528 529 classes buckle down classes as business 53 you have to learn the other stuff first so that you can build it all together, finally Sharon 562 563 classes build it all together classes as business 135 If we both have the same test coming up, a couple Bess 343 345 studying buckle down classes as business 138 that. There definitely was a big difference between first exams versus second exams . Bess 379 384 studying buckle down classes as business 139 Buckling down means just no goofing off, just sitting leaving this room until we do it, or I know how to do Bess 390 392 studying buckle down classes as business 169 Billie 258 259 studying budget classes as business 204 You have to really, really put some serious work into it to get it. Carrie 668 669 classes serious work classes as business 210 Engineering, if you don't constantly look at what you're doing and take some serious study habits into account, you're never gonna pass with a C or a B. Ever. Carrie 704 706 classes into account classes as business

PAGE 94

94 Table 4 3. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 227 Then I feel that the student needs to buckle down, and spend their extracurricular time focusing on what they feel they might have missed from class Marie Christine 1291 1293 teachers buckle down classes as business 10 stay on top of all the homework Carrie 189 190 classes on top of classes as competition 11 you're below you're behind, so far behind that you should just stop. Carrie 190 191 classes behind classes as competition 12 It's really hard to catch up once you're behind with weed outs. Carrie 191 192 classes catch up classes as competition 14 it's such a hard major to contend with Carrie 280 281 classes contend classes as competition 249 get together, think of a game plan and how Bess 1145 1147 classes opponents; game plan; attack classes as competition 72 I just took on way too much that semester Ruth 479 480 classes took on classes as competition 173 Then, of course, you have the professors that are also really committed, but they understand that wanna fail anybody cuz we know this is Billie 393 396 faculty throw a curve classes as competition 181 We need to over perform. Billie 638 female engineer over perform classes as competition 206 Because if you don't stay on top of what they give you every week, then you essentially fall behind in the work and it's really hard to catch up back to the point that the professor is at because he continues to teach. Carrie 679 682 classes fall behind, catch back up classes as competition

PAGE 95

95 Table 4 3. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 7 weed out classes Carrie 169 classes weed out classes as obstacles 8 pain in the you know what Carrie 170 classes pain in the you know what classes as obstacles 25 it's good when you sit down -when they sit down next to you and you realize that they understand the information and so they can help you through it Carrie 393 395 study group through it classes as obstacles 45 Within the classes, I think maybe tha t was -Physics 2 and Calc 3 were my rocky areas Sharon 415 416 classes rocky areas classes as obstacles 50 I would say that they're rocky just because the transition is so different Sharon 504 505 classes rocky classes as obstacles 51 I think that the biggest reason they're the rocky courses is because it is your first semester in college Sharon 518 519 classes rocky course classes as obstacles 68 I found it useful . It actually really did make me feel really included and like, "Hey we're all drowning together in engineering" Ruth 311 313 study group drowning together classes as obstacles 79 It was like the very last course in the critical $10,000 ago, know? Ruth 677 679 classes gonna trip classes as obstacles 134 your own. Bess 342 343 studying force classes as obstacles 180 pressure. Billie 637 638 male perspective added pressure classes as obstacles

PAGE 96

96 Table 4 3. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 197 You always go a little bit deeper into the subject that you're studying than normal stats would . They always make you go the hard route and then they're like, "Oh, by the way, you can just use this formula." Carrie 563 566 classes bit deeper, hard route classes as obstacles 203 Cuz classes like physics two and one and the calc 06:48 classes are all weed out classes. If you're not gonna sit down and do it every night and work on it, then you're not gonna make it. That's what they call a weed out class. Carrie 664 668 classes weed out classes classes as obstacles 205 It was like we're drowning. I can't do any more. [Laughter] We're not gonna make it. There's no more for us to do. Definitely it's really hard to get through. Carrie 669 671 classes drowning, get through classes as obstacles 207 If you don't understand this one little point, you're not able to build onto it. That's how a lotta the engineering classes work. They build onto each other, like circuits one and then next one would be ci rcuits two. Carrie 682 686 classes build onto it classes as obstacles 212 That class is hell. [Laughter] It is literally the worst class in the entire world. Not really. I'm sure there's worse ones out there. Carrie 742 744 classes hell classes as obstacles 235 I even remember being overwhelmed with how being thrown into engineering meant being internship. You gotta get a co op. You gotta do career showcase. Ruth 1133 1135 classes thrown into classes as obstacles

PAGE 97

97 Table 4 3. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 240 that point where you have to decide, am I gonna stick with this major or am I gonna go engineering. I think the cool thing about [the enginee ring] hall is that they said we all know kind of like our goal is aligned. Lizzie 892 897 classes stick with classes as obstacles 55 This is where it all comes -everything comes into play Sharon 569 570 classes into play classes as sport 119 some of my classmates had a lot a very easy time grasping some concepts. I would need a little more time to grasp those concepts or look at it a different way before I really understood it. Lizzie 474 477 classes grasping concepts classes as sport 147 [the university] really likes people to be involved. They like their academics, but they also like to see what extracurriculars you do. How do you juggle things? Bess 655 657 clubs juggle classes as sport 209 They're just immediately gonna jump in to what you already should've learned and keep going. Carrie 688 689 classes jump in classes as sport 213 If you felt alone in your classes, wouldn't that drag you down? You would just feel bad. Not feel, but your psyche wouldn't be as strong because you just feel alone. That's why I think the engineering hall really helps. Carrie 756 759 female engineer drag you down classes as sport 216 You can't really cry in front of a guy cuz your engineering classes are kickin' your butt Carrie 807 808 female engineer kicking your butt classes as sport 236 just jumped on board with that Ruth 1136 1137 classes jumped on board classes as sport

PAGE 98

98 Table 4 3. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 241 We wanna beat these classes that most of us are hall. I feel like the priorities sometimes are different Lizzie 899 901 classes beat classes as sport 247 you have to just dive in. You either need to learn, really quickly, how to swim, or you are to make it up to the surface with the am ount of air you have left. Bess 1043 1049 classes jumping off a diving board; dive in classes as sport 17 playing for the position I am -same position that I am? Carrie 307 308 male perspective playing for the position engineering as competition 20 I'm a fighter, always have been. People say I can't do something, just makes me wanna do it more. Carrie 322 323 interest in engineering fighter engineering as competition 21 You just have to learn to schedule your time properly or you'll fall behind in your classes, or you'll fall behind in sleep, or you just won't have a social life Carrie 334 337 being an engineering student fall behind engineering as competition 22 My go al at this point is to beat him, whatever he does Carrie 354 355 role models beat engineering as competition 23 I will fight for what I want, and that's what he taught me to do Carrie 357 358 role models fighter engineering as competition

PAGE 99

99 Table 4 3. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 189 be there and show that when you get a Billie 792 795 fin al thoughts worth it engineering as competition 195 just need to work hard to get to where you wanna be, and not really let anyone push you down Billie 899 900 final thoughts push you down engineering as competition 46 To get straight down to it, those were literally the reasons why I did those two Sharon 457 458 clubs straight down to it engineering as a path 74 Just getting more in depth into my core classes Ruth 581 582 faculty in depth engineering as a path 75 Now what's happening with the new path I've taken I'm interacting a lot because it's actually specific to what I want to do Ruth 587 588 faculty new path engineering as a path 76 It's just so hard to say, because even though it's with what I want to do Ruth 595 596 faculty new path engineering as a path 77 whereas in engineering I never really got to that point yet Ruth 596 597 faculty that point engineering as a path 78 when I talk about my new path, I'm more focusing on my minor, which is [the university] Teach Mathematics Ruth 624 624 female engineer new path engineering as a path 80 All I knew was that the major sounded really good, and it really did line up with my interests. Ruth 761 763 major line up engineering as a path

PAGE 100

100 Table 4 3. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 81 really all I can say is now that I know imagined Ruth 780 782 major new path engineering as a path 85 Other than I know that my college path is definitely not a traditional one. Ruth 946 947 major college path engineering as a path 86 Ruth 947 major switching gears engineering as a path 123 Being a female engineering student is like taking the unpaved road, kind of. Lizzie 733 734 female engineer unpaved road engineering as a path 124 Just because, at least for me, growing up, all of the women in my family and in my figures were all males. For me to step out of that gender role was going through the unpaved road. Lizzie 738 741 female engineer unpaved road engineering as a path 225 The teacher spends a lot of the time going over the same concepts trying to make sure that everybody understands, but in doing that I feel like they lose people Marie Christine 1283 1285 teachers lose people engineering as a path 226 Because they don't know -the students don't know if they're moving on to a new topic, or staying on the same topics, just because the way that they're phrasing it is so completely different from the way they were saying it. It's so different from the way that the book presents it. Marie Christine 1287 1291 teachers moving on engineering as a path

PAGE 101

101 Table 4 3. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 251 That we love what we do. We know that this is a super hard major. If it was super easy, everyone would be doing it. That most of us we stick with it. Despite it being difficult, despite there not being a lot of our gender, which is really hard if you want to find people to li ve with. Mom is not gonna be okay with me living with a bunch of guys. That despite all the challenges that we go through, we love change my major, ever. Bess 1186 1194 metaphor presentation stick with it engineering as a path 43 It paid off Sharon 319 connection to COE paid off engineering as business 208 If you didn't understand circuits one and you didn't grasp the material, you're not gonna be very good at circuits two cuz that's what they're gonna use. Carrie 686 688 classes grasp the material engineering as sport 157 r typical first/second year dorm, which is good cuz I focus on work and stuff. Billie 59 61 life in LLC typical engineering as work

PAGE 102

102 Different as Normal The fourth interpretive metaphor from the data connects the unknown to the known through the concepts of difference and normality . While difference is seen as being distinct or not like the standard, normality is seen as being commonplace or the usual. The Different as Normal interpreti ve metaphor reflects the acknowledgement that women engineers are different from the male student majority in engineering classes, but the metaphor also represents how the women respond to this difference. This interpretive metaphor includes the three cat egories of outsiders , being equal, and difference as unifying . The first theme is the awareness of being an outsider or being different. The other two themes represent awareness. The first theme within the Different metaphor reflects the awareness of being an outsider. Within this context, many of the women used metaphors that indicated they were aware they were in the minority. Much of the language used within this theme included terminology of being different as well as p hrases of awareness like standing out and smack in the face . For the women, the awareness of being different came at different moments throughout their college career. For Bess , her moment came when she entered an engineering classroom and looked around the room. She noted There was probably 75 kids in the room and three other girls. That was kind of like group projects, it smack in the face notes that she had not previously given her difference much thought; therefore, becoming aware of being different from the male majority in such a visible fashion was sudden and startling.

PAGE 103

103 While Lizzie had previously noted the lack of other women in engineering through her classes, it was not until her summer internship that she became aware of what being in the minority would mean for her car eer . She described that Literally my entire team of coworkers were men, white males, who were 50 years for the other interns that were in other buildings. I never felt like I really fit in that well, but I definitely learned a lot. In Lizzie gender and race . Other women of racial minority status noted similar experiences, but Billie d While the outsider theme was used by many of the participants, Billie was the most frequent contributor of language to th is theme . Her awareness of her outsider status came when the summer she was in study groups with only men because the other women in her major were not taking summer school . During that summer, Billie awareness of her outsider status very clear to her . they would think f the guys. Billie did more harm because the men in her study group were forgetting that she was an individual . She descri bed that they need to understand that you

PAGE 104

104 Through this experience, Billie was then able to appreciate the support and comfort she felt with other female engineering students . She added that nds, but at the same time, They just do their thing. Similar to Billie , Marie Christine had an experience in a study group where the men treated her differently . She felt that the men were not they're putting me off in their head. It's more like, oh, these is one of this is one of the few Upon reflecting on being the minority or outsider, the women had two responses . The first is the desire to be seen as equals . While they were aware of being different, the women felt it was not something of which to be concerned . They wanted to be seen as equals because of their work . Language used in this theme included descriptions of being different but equal or discussions of how differences were only apparent if you drew attention to them. Many of the women noted that they wanted to be seen as the same as the men in engineering . Marie Christine descri . For her, being a female I mean, just like bein g Sharon concurred about the awareness of her minority status being such a small concern for her. For her, the concern was on the goal at hand . She found that Being a female an engineer in engineering it gives you the opportunity to shine next to a girl, a guy .

PAGE 105

105 Ruth agreed that the awareness was there on her part, but it was not anything about which she needed to worry or be concerned . She explained that as intimidating or anything. Again, I just feel like it feels like a this general For them, the lack of women in engineering was just a reality that they and their classmates could acknowledge and then mov e forward. Marie Christine noted that the awareness of women being the minority in the class was only there if one drew attention to it. You only stand out if you really analyze it. If you're looking at it from an external point of view versus a fresh pe rson point of view, then it's you notice the difference, but if you're one on one interacting with the people, it that there is a difference. She further noted that setting them apart from everybody else is definitely not helping, because then you are you stand out within the community. It's like, oh, these are all the females in engineering. It brings your attention more to it versus than just letting people interact on their own and interact with everybody else as an equal. In acknowled ging the differences, Bess provided advice on how to help others see female engineering students as a normal part of everyday life . Her advice to those who would view hey can Marie Christine provided advice to other women engineering students . She felt that Talking to them, interacting with them, doing homework, group study . l . I think it depends on the way that you view yourself, and then that will reflect on your interactions with other people . Confidence in your work, and the way that you interact with people . If you know yourself to be a certain way, that you put yourse lf out like that, people will recognize you as an individual that you are.

PAGE 106

106 The second response to their awareness of being the minority or outsider was that the women felt being different made them proud and feel special . For them, what makes them differe nt also makes them special . Phrases used in this theme included descriptions of rarity or being different. Just as each of the women are unique and special, so too are their responses of what it means to be a female engineer . Two of the women noted that the difference was because they were rare and unique . Bess rls are like unicorns in engineering Carrie added a similar but different perspective in that she felt You defi rare. I'm the precious stone that everyone wants in their workforce because I'm that person that's gonna go and get what they need to get to get done For both of them, the fac t that there were so few other women in engineering classes was something that they wanted to celebrate and be proud. For Sharon , it was not the fact the she was different from the majority that she celebrated . Instead, it was what the difference allowed her to bring to engineering, to her classes, and to any group or team in which she played a part . Her description of being a female engineering student . It gives you the opportunity to do something that nobody els On the other hand, Ruth noted the difference, accepted the difference, and found a way to make the difference something that was accepted as fact or commonplace . For her, being a female e ngineer is not n ormal, but we make it normal.

PAGE 107

107 Overall, Lizzie provided a quote that connects each of the themes of the Different as Normal metaphor together . Upon reflecting on the metaphor during the second interview, she noted that the way I saw it was, okay, I would think, especially in my beginning engineering classes that year, I thought it was so cool that I had the opportunity to be there and be learning these things. Like I said before, I had this pride of being different. At the same time, I think it was made You feel more normal. Lizzie was able to acknowledge that she was different from many of her classmates, and that was something in which she could take pride . However, she also did not want to draw unwanted attention to that fact nor did she want other s tudents to act as if being different made her different. The interpretive metaphor of Different as Normal describes the reaction to their awareness that they were somehow different from the majority of their classmates . One interesting note is that few of the metaphors used by the women reflected that they viewed this difference as a negative quality . Instead, they used language that reflected a positive quality or language that reflected a sense of neutrality . Table 4 4 displays the indica ting text of data for the interpretive metaphor of the Different as Normal. Female Engineers as Support System Throughout the interview process, the participants included metaphors of their experience in the engineering LLP that related to the concept of a support system . A support system can be seen as a network of personal and professional contacts who provide practical and moral support . The Female Engineers as Support System interpretive metaphor reflects the way in which each of the women shows supp ort and encouragement to one another; however, this support extends beyond the walls of the residence hall . It extends to other female engineers as well including

PAGE 108

108 Table 4 4. Data Table for Different as Normal Metaphor. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 18 You've gotta open up your eyes and let people show you what they can do Carrie 312 313 male perspective open up your eyes being equal 96 setting them apart from everybody else is definitely not helping, because then you are you stand out within the community. It's like, oh, these are all the females in engineering. It brings your attention more to it versus than just letting people interact on their own and interact with everybody else as an equal Marie Christine 517 521 female engineer stand out being equal 100 You only stand out if you really analyze it. If you're looking at it from an external point of view versus a fresh person point of view, then it's you notice the difference, but if you're one on one interacting with the people, it difference. Marie Christine 748 752 female engineer stand out being equal 102 Is like, I guess, being any other type of engineering I mean, just like being an engineering student? Marie Christine 820 821 female engineer any other type being equal 188 and how you have women in huge companies that are trying to bust through, it feels like that sometimes in terms of the posturing. Billie 789 791 female engineer glass ceiling being equal 190 breaking through a glass ceiling. Billie 802 803 female engineer glass ceiling being equal

PAGE 109

109 Table 4 4. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 228 I feel like for the most part being a female engineer, especially I feel like most of the time women are the ones putting women down for the most part. In that reflected I feel like it's almost become a commercialized commodity. It's taken away a little bit of the actual significance of being a female engineer. Marie Christine 1332 1336 female engineer commercialized commodity being equal 231 That material comes from society and the way that things are put out there . Because of the way that things are put out there, and because being a female engineer is a commodity, I feel that it -that being a female engineer is more than what people view as being a female engineer. Marie Christine 1362 1367 female engineer commodity being equal 232 That kind of equal, but slightly different maybe. Marie Christine 1400 female engineer equal being equal 237 Again, I just feel like it feels like a really freak out over this. You go into these classes knowing that there are gonna be general Ruth 1173 1179 female engineer freak out being equal

PAGE 110

110 Table 4 4. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 62 It's like being a marker in a crayon box . It gives you the opportunity to do something that nobody else has necessary thought of before, or thought you could do before. Sharon 910 912 female engineer marker in a crayon box difference as unifying 84 so many female engineers as involved as the female engineers are here at [the university]. make it normal. Ruth 923 927 female engineer making abnormal normal difference as unifying 101 different; it's always a treat. Marie Christine 799,812 LLC metaphor box of chocolates difference as unifying 141 Girls are like unicorns in engineering. Bess 469 female engineer unicorns difference as unifying 152 and once you find one Bess 695, 699 female engineer unicorns difference as unifying 211 You definitely feel like you're outta place, but the precious stone that everyone wants in their workforce because I'm that person that's gonna go and get what they need to get Carrie 719 723 female engineer precious stone difference as unifying 214 You just feel like a million bucks because someone is proud of you and what you're doing. Carrie 803 804 female engineer million bucks difference as unifying

PAGE 111

111 Table 4 4. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 221 There is a much larger percentage of males within engineering than females, but I feel like that is not necessarily a limiting factor. individual from going out there and pursuing opportunities. If anything, being a female in engineering is almost an advantage, because of I don't know, it's positive discrimination. Marie Christine 1090 1091, 1096 1099 female engineer positive discrimination difference a s unifying 39 she's just a very right in your face type of personality, just very here I am, this is me, which was great Sharon 191 192 community right in your face outsiders 103 it's not like they're putting me off in their head. It's more like, oh, these is one of this is one of the few girls in my classes, kind of thing. Marie Christine 822 824 male perspective putting me off outsiders 118 I saw a TED talk where they talk about the common thing in engineering, where you Lizzie 463 467 male perspective imposter syndrome outsiders 120 I think, the more I learned how to study and how to perform well in my classes, the better I felt like I fit in. Lizzie 512 513 classes fit in outsiders

PAGE 112

112 Table 4 4. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 121 Literally my entire team of coworkers were men, white males, who were 50 years or female engineer that summer, except for the other interns that were in other buildings. I never felt like I really fit in that well, but I definitely learned a lot. Lizzie 593 598 internship fit in outsiders 140 There was probably 75 kids in the room and three other girls. That was kind of like a Once I got to know people in the class and we started doing group projects, it di become a big issue. Bess 422 425 female engineer smack you in the face outsiders 153 really grasp his get his mind around that. Bess 755 758 male perspective grasp, get his mind around it outsiders 174 Billie 548 550 male perspective one of the guys outsiders 175 They would forget that I was a girl or they they would think they treat me Billie 563 565 male perspective one of the guys outsiders

PAGE 113

113 Table 4 4. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 176 You would think every girl wanted to be treated as one of the guys. No, you they say things that are just No, you need to girl, acknowledge that and we can be Billie 567 573 male perspective one of the guys outsiders 182 Billie 653 654 study group cranked it out outsiders 183 I think it is that added pressure that you things about, Billie 656 658 study group added pressure, on top of things outsiders 184 feel that way with the guys friends, but at the same time, you can see their thing. Billie 675 679 study group do their thing outsiders 191 knocking on doors like we can. Billie 828 829 female engineer going in blind outsiders

PAGE 114

114 Table 4 4. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 192 If everything fails, you have a place to go to. We it just because of what I look like. Billie 829 832 male perspective sta rting from scratch outsiders 223 Because they would feel like it's them against the world essentially. Marie Christine 1205 1206 study group against the world outsiders 243 just looking at them and seeing that they have internships, that was so striking to me. That really inspired me. I would almost know. That was my starting point for me because I was really doubting where I was gonna go and if I fit it Lizzie 976 980 role models fit in outsiders

PAGE 115

115 graduate students, faculty members, and industry leaders. This interpretive metaphor includes the two categories of role models as encouragement and women as community. The first theme focused on the women the participants saw as role models. For insta nce, Lizzie discussed several mentors who she viewed as role models. Their lasting impact on her eeing that there were girls who did it, that really inspired me. That made me ineering was seeing that other Sharon believed that connecting with upper class female students is just a natural outcome of being a part of the engineering LLP . She explained that as I also think that within [the engineering LLP], yo u live on like an all female floor. If you have a female role model or if you interact with female engineers in [the She realized that the setup of the program and the phy sical design of the building would naturally lead one to find those role models. Two of the participants also found role models from the student staff member s who worked in the engineering LLP . courses, Sharon found a study partner who also became a role model . henever I had questions, I would just come in and talk to her, and we would study together . . . S he was a go Lizzie found motivation from interacting with her peer mentor . achievements was so inspiring to me . That really pushed me to do mo Two of the women found role models because of their interest in research. Sharon attended a presentation where a faculty member presented some of her research. While listeni ng t o the presentation, Sharon quickly realized how motivational this professor was. As she put it, was like, wow, this lady

PAGE 116

116 because she does such great research within her field Meanwhile, Marie Christine witnessed a role model in a post doctoral position who le d the research team in which Marie Christine worked . Noticing her organization skills and how well she seemed to balance aspects of her life, Marie Christine described her A common phrase used with this theme was look up to , and other language described role models as a source of encouragement. The use of the phrase look up indicates that the support system is not a flat, one dimensional network. Instead, there are layers within it. For women early in their engineering careers, there are those women above them in classes, in experience, and in positions of power/authority. Inherent in this language is that there are also role models on the same level and women below them who might eventually look up to them as role models. In this sense, the support system is ever expanding and growing as more women enter the engineering f ield. Many of the women used metaphors that indicated they found a sense of unity among other women engineers, which represented the second theme within the Support System interpretive metaphor . These engineers may be peers, instructors, or industry leade rs . Phrases used in this metaphor reflect a sense of unity like stick together and come together . Sometimes these support systems are formalized through group project . Marie Christine level engineering classes, the girls tend Billie noticed the benefit of having other female engineering students as members of a study group or group project . She descr ibed it as I think I feel that girls are more productive. We get it

PAGE 117

117 but at the end of the day, we get it done as fast possible. For Billie , the support she felt came from the fact that they were able to focus on their purpose of being there. Carrie believes the support system is a necessity to survive as an engineerin g student . telling you that you're doing wonderful, that you are really going above and beyond of what a Bess believes the support syst em is a natural aspect of the fact that there are so few women in engineering . . Female engineers tend to be, so we had a lot of Sharon agrees that the wo Carrie Bess agreed . She found support from another resident of the hall . Bess same Lizzie also found that she easily related with the other residents . about [the engineering] hall. These girls were just like that, so you click with them, too. When presented with all of the interpretive metaphors, the Female Engineers as Support System is the one that the participants felt was present in all aspects of their experience . Several of the women described thi experiences together . Ruth agreed that it was present in all of the other four metaphors, but that that you call home, and then having a support s Carrie

PAGE 118

118 while Lizzie 1 illustrates how the Female Engineers as Support System metaphor is both a standalone metaphor and partially incorporated into each of the other four interpretive metaphors. The interpretive metaphor of Female Eng ineers as Support System describes the way the women assist each other in the engineering LLP, in classes, and in their interactions elsewhere on campus . The supportive nature is both individualized and group based . One of the best descriptions ca me from Lizzie as she explains how this support system plays out on campus. engineers. It really boils down to academics and stuff. I find it kind of like a big sister or something. If you know that a girl already went through to a girl who already went through it than a guy who went through it to ask her for advice and that respect, finding the resources and finding the getting the things you need to be successful in each of your classes . Table 4 5 displays the indicating text of data for the i nterpretive metaphor of Female Engineers as Support System. Table 4 6 displays the indicating text of data not organized into any of the five interpretive metaphors.

PAGE 119

119 Table 4 5. Data Table for Female Engineers as Support System Metaphor. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 38 she was a good person to look up to and to study with because she had really good study habits Sharon 164 165 staff look up to Role model as encouragement 57 She's really, really great -really nice, very knowledgeable, really someone that you can look up to Sharon 798 799 role models look up to Role model as encouragement 58 She was my go to lady Sharon 809 810 role models go to Role model as encouragement 59 She'd be like "oh that's not a stupid question. I'll show you this." She was really great. Definitely someone I could look up to Sharon 814 815 role models look up to Role model as encouragement 60 She's definitely someone to look up to within material science, because she does such great research within her field -so much so that I don't even think she realizes how great it is Sharon 845 848 role models look up to Role model as encouragement 61 I was like, wow, this girl, she knows what she's doing. She's got it going on. Sharon 824 825 role models got it going on Role model as encouragement 98 She's totally on her shit, and she's on everything and she's very on time and she's very neat. Marie Christine 663 664 role models on her shit Role model as encouragement 111 I think seeing her and her achievements was so inspiring to me . That really pushed me to do more things. Lizzie 227 229 mentors pushed Role model as encouragement 113 Finding these mentors was like having those older sibling that I always wanted Lizzie 266 267 mentors older sibling Role model as encouragement 115 I felt like it was easier to approach her Lizzie 390 professor easier Role model as encouragement 185 the maturity because of what they have had to Billie 720 723 role models look up to Role model as encouragement

PAGE 120

120 Table 4 5. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 193 you need to give up something or as just a professional, a female women in the professional world, you have to give something up, or to be really successful or to get everything done, something it has to go. I like the fact that she has her family. She has this position in research it all. Billie 858 863 female engineer give something up, have it all Role model as encouragement 194 some women have to give up a lot to get Billie 868 870 role models give something up Role model as encouragement 244 Seeing that there were girls who did it, that really inspired me. That made me honestly, engineering was seeing that other girls had done it. Lizzie 981 983 role models stick Role model as encouragement 16 those three girls become a close knit group Carrie 294 female engineer close knit group women as community 28 You just get a vibe of whether they are or not Carrie 430 431 study group vibe women as community 37 so we just kinda paired up Sharon 161 staff paired up women as community 41 Her and I, right away, didn't really click very well. Sharon 195 196 community clicks women as community 97 In groups, when there are groups in lower level engineering classes, the girls tend to come together more often. Marie Christine 569 570 study group come together women as community

PAGE 121

121 Table 4 5. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 117 thing about [the engineering] hall. These girls were just like that, so you click with them, too. Lizzie 452 453 life in LLC click women as community 122 stars, but you're all learning to play in your first manager position. You know buildi ng, so you learn from each other. Lizzie 723 727 LLC metaphor NBA stars, future CEOs women as community 130 to be, so we had a lot of things in common. together. Bess 161 163 female engineer stick together women as community 131 Another girl who was also my major that we often, neither of us Bess 223 226 socializing hang out women as community 132 Bess 327 328 staff on the level women as community 133 It was pretty much just the support system were going to study with me. Bess 341 342 staff support system women as community 137 Having a good support system, and people who are on the same boat as you . Bess 346 347 studying support system, on the same boat women as community 146 If you were a better fit in another society, go there by all means. Bess 646 clubs a better fit women as community

PAGE 122

122 Table 4 5. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 150 You had a support system there . Bess 673 LLC metaphor support system women as community 159 that was a really good idea of what you connection Billie 172 175 life in LLC back and forth women as community 179 I think I feel that girls are more productive. We get it around about things, but at the e nd of the day, we get it done as fast possible. Billie 591 595 studying get it done women as community 196 people or passing on the information and because hopefully they can use that and better themselves. Billie 904 907 final thoughts opening that door women as community 215 I feel like there is definitely a support system in the engineering halls. Carrie 805 806 female engineer support system women as community 217 but you can cry in front of another girl and they'll comfort you. I mean, it's definitely a support system. Yeah. Carrie 808 810 female engineer support system women as community 219 You need a support system. If you didn't have family supporting you, if you don't have someone telling you that you're doing wonderful, that you are really going above and beyond of what a normal person in engineering would do, a normal [inaudible] would do Carrie 847 851 final thoughts support system, normal person women as community

PAGE 123

123 Table 4 5. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 238 Yeah, cuz it definitely helps with the whole I guess like females being a minority in engineering. SWE definitely helps, and e Swamp just breaks the ice for everyone. Ruth 1341 1343 clubs breaks the ice women as community 242 network at [the university] with all of the engineers. It really boils down to academics and stuff. I find it think, kind of like a big sister or something. If you know that a girl already went thr and go up to a girl who already went through it than a guy who went through it to ask her for advice and support on exams and stuff tem in that respect, finding the resources and finding the getting the things you need to be successful in each of your classes. Lizzie 962 970 female engineer big sister women as community 248 I definitely like comparing it to a sports team. I first thought of, I don't know, football have your back. I don't know that much about sports, but [laughter] you have them, who have your back. Then everyone has a different role on the team, and it just gives you a great sense of community, and things like that. Bess 1126 1131 community sports team women as community

PAGE 124

124 Table 4 5. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 218 You can't completely take it out and make it its own section cuz it's definitely melded into the other ones, Carrie 814 815 female engineer melded 245 overarching umbrella. Lizzie 1002 1003 metaphor presentation overarching umbrella

PAGE 125

125 Table 4 6. Data Table of Indicating Text Not Used in an Interpretive Metaphors. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 108 Because it raised my expectations of myself . I can honestly attribute every success to the people there who have pushed me completely to go beyond what I always think is possible, and to become that Lizzie 182 185 clubs pushed me clubs as support 109 The leader, him and I just really clicked. Lizzie 194 195 male mentor clicked clubs as support 110 They literally pushed me to go to the career showcase, all of these things that I might not have done by myself because I was scared Lizzie 203 205 mentors pushed clubs as support 89 The c ollege of e ngineering to me had just pretty been like this looming presence Marie Christine 213 215 connection to COE looming presence college as unknown figure 90 Not necessarily intimidating. Not like Big Brother is watching you. Marie Christine 227 228 connection to COE Big Brother college as unknown figure 91 Just knowing that I fall under this, but I have very little experience with this. Like an older sibling that is never there but you know exists . Marie Christine 232 234 connection to COE older sibling college as unknown figure 145 wanna pop in and ask a simple question, I can get you in and out of there. Bess 551 553 professor pop in faculty as support 155 older kids in my major, once you get to your higher level classes, they really pour into you. They really want you to succeed. They encourage you to just come up, talk to them. If you have a question raise your hand and shout it out. We have some very good professors here. Bess 840 845 faculty pour into you faculty as support 9 real college Carrie 178 classes real college

PAGE 126

126 Table 4 6. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 13 all of a sudden it clicks Carrie 260 classes clicks 15 your balloon deflates, you're alone Carrie 293 female engineer balloon deflates 19 it runs in my blood Carrie 321 interest in engineering runs in my blood 26 you guys don't clash very well, just females in general sometimes just don't clash well Carrie 405 406 study group clash 27 It's like sometimes we clash, like I had -we've already been like, what, two months into living in the Hall and I've already clashed with like five people on the floor, just because you have different personalities Carrie 408 412 study group clash 29 we've been going through advisors like candy recently Carrie 452 453 staff going through like candy 30 I just wish that Engineering would find an advisor that sticks so that the freshman coming in can possibly have the same experience with their advisor as I did Carrie 463 465 staff sticks 40 I take a little slower approach to making friends sometimes Sharon 194 195 community slower approach 47 Obviously there's a big difference between community college and real college, or university Sharon 477 478 classes real college 48 I was used to having all those opportunities right at my fingertips when it comes to -at the community college that I went to Sharon 480 482 classes at my fingertips

PAGE 127

127 Table 4 6. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 49 The opportunities that were once right at my fingertips and very easy to access were here, still as easy to access, but you just had to know about them, or you had to find out about them Sharon 505 507 classes at my fingertips 54 Thermo is my first clicking my first class where it just clicked, like wow, this is where everything comes together Sharon 568 569 classes clicking 56 Or I'll just strike up a conversation with random people around me Sharon 633 634 study group strike up 69 It's how I learn best is when or how I solidify things best. Ruth 321 study group solidify 70 Just my personal studying habits, like If I get something down, then I like to explain it to other people cuz it really, really solidifies it in my head. Ruth 321 324 study group get something down, solidify 73 They weren't life changing or anything, positively or negatively Ruth 572 573 faculty life changing 83 Just like the college y feel, getting used to everything, and meeting new people, and going crazy for exams. Ruth 908 909 LLC metaphor college y feel 87 At the same time, I wonder how my engineering brain is gonna come into play when I become a teacher because most teachers who teach math are math majors. Ruth 950 954 major into play 93 I think SWE, to me to me SWE feels cold . Marie Christine 402 403 clubs cold

PAGE 128

128 Table 4 6. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 94 They have a lot of events, but it does still feel very withdrawn and cold. Marie Christine 411 412 clubs cold 95 She was present more often than I was. I guess she just kinda drifted away from it. Marie Christine 437 438 clubs drifted away 104 My father is very on my case about everything. Marie Christine 886 887 male perspective on my case 105 Because my father is very much the head of the household Marie Christine 913 male perspective head of the household 107 I just got involved like crazy there. Lizzie 165 166 clubs like crazy 112 I didn't know how to reach out for solutions Lizzie 266 mentors reach out 114 To them, they almost seemed very easy, but to me, it was eye opening to learn some things like there's a tutoring service that goes over the reviews. Lizzie 270 272 mentors eye opening 116 click with guys. Lizzie 451 452 being a female engineer click 125 I dunno if other girls have mentioned this, but at [the engineering] hall, you find all ranges have your really stereotypical smelly, weird, really introverted engineers that kind of scare you. You also have the other spectrum, I guess. Girls who are in sororiti es and are engineer [the engineering] hall female. Lizzie 749 754 life in LLC Stereotypical, super girly, common 126 what all the dorms are like? Get reviews on Bess 46 48 choosing residence hall helicopter mom

PAGE 129

129 Table 4 6. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 142 Even though I took a bunch of APs in high work spread over an entire year. The teachers were a lot more babying. They what you need to know for this exam. This is what you need to know for this exam. Bess 479 481 high school teachers babying 143 what you need to know for this exam. This is Bess 481 483 high school teachers spoon feed 144 many more concepts that you need to absorb. Bess 487 488 classes absorb 154 Bess 837 838 faculty luck of the draw 156 Originally I was pretty bummed about going to have a hissy fit, but when it was finally decided that I was going to [ the university] I was bummed. Bess 853 857 final thoughts bummed 160 was or if they could even get a position as a first year, taking that extra step, really I feel like impressed the recruiters. I was rea lly proud of that. Billie 178 181 getting involved extra step 164 in [the engineering] hall and actually have girls that you can talk to even though sometimes you step back and do your job. Billie 221 223 socializing step back

PAGE 130

130 Table 4 6. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 165 Billie 233 234 balancing roles step back 166 get, to be honest, having those different roles, has to be in this boundary or this is what goes Billi e 234 238 balancing roles redraw lines, boundaries 168 Okay, now I have to redraw that boundary Billie 244 balancing roles redraw the boundary 170 Sometimes there are those days where, either my job is just being put on the back burner for a second. Billie 259 262 studying on the back burner 171 I see them necessarily hang out with them. I think at one point, I did go with a couple residents. Billie 267 268 socializing hang out 172 relationship lines. Billie 346 clubs weaving 177 Then other people that like to mess, push my buttons or mess with me, would just go ahead and do it Billie 579 580 male perspective push buttons 178 hung out with a lot of guys. Billie 580 582 socializing hung out 222 I felt SWE was very cold Marie Christine 1187 clubs cold

PAGE 131

131 Table 4 6. Continued. Data # Indicating Text Participant Line Location Reference Point Metaphor Text Metaphorical Category 229 really love the company, I love the way the company -she was a very good salesperson. She was lovely. Then she had an off key. After she hit the off key, I was less enchanted by her words. Marie Christine 1351 1356 industry recruiter off key 230 For that same reason, because she knows all these pitches to hit, because she has experience in this skill of weaving people in, I feel that where that comes from she needs material to work with. Marie Christine 1360 1362 industry recruiter pitches to hit, weaving people in

PAGE 132

132 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND CONCLUSIONS LLP . The data, collected through semi structured interviews, were analyzed using a modified version of Systematic Metaphorical Analysis . The chapter is organized into six sections . The first section compares the results of this study to findings from previous research , while the second section describes the significance of the findings . The third section discusses the implications for theory . The next section describes implications for future practice, while the fifth section considers the implications for future research . Finally, so me conclusions about the study are drawn. Relationship of the Results to Prior Research It is important to consider the results of this study in relation to prior research on the experiences of women in an engineering LLP and the experiences of women in en gineering in general . When the results of the present study are compared with prior research, two patterns emerge . In some cases, the results support prior research . In other instances, the results contradict those of prior studies . An examination of p rior research provides a context in which to place the findings. The present study supports several previous research findings . Previous research indicated that one of the needs for women to be retained in higher education is a sense of community (Daemple , 2003 2004; Landry, 2002 2003; Wentling & Camacho, 2008) . Furthermore, previous research indicated that students in LLPs receive a greater sense of community than their non LLP counterparts (Blackhurst et al., 2003 ; Domizi, 2008) and that women in LLPs w ere more likely to interact frequently with peers (Inkelas et al., 2006) . Both the LLP as a Neighborhood and the Female Engineers as a Support System interpretive

PAGE 133

133 metaphors reflect the positive aspect of interactions with fellow female engineers provided to the LLP participants. Within the Engineering Classes as Challenges interpretive metaphor, the women noted that they viewed their classes as obstacles to overcome . Previous studies revealed that students who persisted in engineering had the commonality of the motivation to succeed (Suresh, 2006 2007; Wasburn & Miller, 2004 2005 ). Women as role models and as mentors for students is one of the most cited support programs that assist in retaining female engineering students (Knight & Cunningham; Meyers et al., 2010; Stage & Kinzie, 2009; Wasburn & Miller, 2004 2005) . Findings from the present study support this research . The Female Engineers as a Support System interpretive metaphor includes language that describes role models in ways that show support an d encouragement. Previous research found that the feeling of tokenism and perceptions of gender stereotypes as barriers for female engineering students (Bergvall et al., 1994; Goldman, 2012; Heyman, et al., 2002; Wao, et al., 2010; Wasburn & Miller, 2004 2 005) . The present study both supported and contradicted this research . Within the Different as Normal interpretive metaphor, the women indicated that they were aware of being a minority within their classes . While the participants noted they were differ ent from the majority of male students in engineering classes, some of them did not see this as an obstacle but as something that made them special and as a point of pride . This sense of pride also supports the research of Bieri Buschor, Berwerger, Frei, and Kappler (2014) that women chose their STEM major because they felt a sense of uniqueness in being a woman in a male dominated field. While the present study supported some previous research, it also contradicted other previous research . For instance, a prior study suggested that LLPs provided a more scholarly

PAGE 134

134 environment in the residence hall than traditional halls through additional study locations ( Inkelas & Weisman, 2003; Wawrzynski, et al., 2009) . The results of the present study do not support th ese findings . Within the LLP as a Neighborhood interpretive metaphor theme of building, several of the participants noted that they only used the LLP to fulfill physiological needs and found study locations elsewhere on campus. Previous research found tha t LLP participants were more likely to be engaged in residence hall activities (Inkelas & Weisman, 2003) and were more likely to use residence hall resources (Inkelas et al., 2006) . The results of the present study do not support these findings . Both the LLP as a Starting Point and the LLP as a Neighborhood interpretive metaphors describe a more social atmosphere within the residence hall, but little mention is given by the participants to formal residence hall activities or events. In general, the presen t study both supports and contradicts prior research on the topic of experiences of women in an engineering LLP and the experiences of women in engineering in general . Within the five interpretive metaphors presented within this current study, data is pro them. Significance of Findings developed interpretive metaphors that provide a me thod to understand the experience . Reflected within these metaphors are three significant findings: the LLP creates a sense of community for participants regardless of their level of involvement , the creation of advantage based metaphors that use a positive description of women in engineering , and the LLP provi d es a residence hall environment that is supportive of STEM students regardless of gender.

PAGE 135

135 The first significant finding is that the LLP creates a sense of community for participants regardless of their level of involvement . Within the LLP as Neighborhood interpretive metaphor, the participants noted that the sense of community and belonging were present throughout the LLP regardless of the level of involvement . This supports research by Black hurst et al. (2003 ) and Inkelas and Weisman (2003) that LLPs provide a sense of community and provide a positive environment for participants. This finding also supports research by Landry (2002 2003) that a cohort of supportive people and groups is impor tant to retain women in higher education. While Spanierman et al. (2013) examined the types of residence hall activities that foster a sense of community, to my knowledge no study has looked at the frequency of involvement on sense of community . Just as G arrett and Zabriskie (200 4 ) found a second hand effect of student faculty involvement present for residents of an LLP regardless of their level of involv ement, the present study mirrors this finding in terms of sense of community . Participants who are not highly involved on their floor or within the LLP still describe the presence of a sense of community, even if they choose not to be an actively involved member within that community. The findings of the present study indicate residents of a LLP may feel a second hand sense of community felt due to the mere presence of the LLP. A second significant finding is the creation of advantage based metaphors that use a positive description of women in engineering . T he current literature uses metaphors like the leaky pipeline ( Blickenstaff, 2005; Lucena, 2000) and chilly climate (Hall & Sandler, 1982) to describe the experiences of female undergraduates in engineering from a negative viewpoint or a deficit model , but the findings of the present study describe the experience in a positive viewpoint or an advantage model . While the deficit model looks at students as underprepared or

PAGE 136

136 at risk and develops programs and initiatives to fix these shortcomings, the advantage model Although participants described their experience within the engineering LLP in mostly favorable terms, it seems unlikely that their c omments were positive simply because they were interviewing with an administrator . The findings of the present study should be seen as a step in the direction of research using the advantage model to describe the experiences of this population. Advantage based models provide insight into the unique role women can play in engineering and allows us to better understand what creates a positive, welcoming environment for the women . Further exploration of advantage based models will assist in meeting the goal of increasing representation of tradition ally (Castro, 2012, p. 6). The advantage based metaphors also can be seen as the firs t step in creating a new metaphor to describe recruitment an d retention programs in STEM (Lucena, 2000) . While the findings of the current research do no t provide an overarching metaphor like the pipeline, the findings should be seen as a step in the right direction. The final significant finding is the LLP provi d es a residence hall environment that is supportive of STEM students regardless of gender . In their description of the engineering LLP, the participants gave little description of negative experiences within the LLP environment because of their gender . Wi thin the LLP as Neighborhood interpretive metaphor, the participants noted a sense of belonging and community, while the participants describe activities associated with the LLP that they used to overcome difficult academic coursework within the Engineerin g Classes as Challenges interpretive metaphor.

PAGE 137

137 Within the context of the current study, the participants lived on a women only floor of a co ed residence hall. This structural setup seems to provide the participants with the positive benefits associated w ith both a women only and a co ed LLP . Inkelas (2011) found w omen who participate in women only STEM LLPs were more likely to report a successful social transition and confidence in their S TEM courses; however, Szelenyi et al. (2013) found women who parti cipate in co ed STEM LLPs were more likely to report a successful academic transition to college because they are able to gain confidence and see themselves as professionally successful in the company of men. While the LLP environment was supportive for women in STEM, the findings of the present study indicate that other environments are not as supportive . Within the Different as Normal interpretive metaphor, the women described instances of group study with male classmates or experiences in internships with older male supervisors that reinforced their awareness of outsiders in engineering based on their gender. Furthermore, within t he Engineering Classes as Challenges interpretive metaphor are description s of obstacles that seem to be common metaphors of all engineers ( e. g. , ; however, th e fighting and battle metaphorical language used by the participants could be reflective of research indicating that female engineering students are less c onfident in their math and science ability than male students are ( Vogt, 2003 ) . These metaphorical phrases may also reflect a response from engineering women that is representative of an overcompensation response due to stereot ype threat (Steele, 1997) . This occurs when someone from a group about which a common stereotype is held (e.g., women are not good at math and science) tries to prove that they do not fit the stereotype.

PAGE 138

138 The findings of the present study provide an example of how metaphors can suggest appropriate interventions (Carpenter, 2008) . As reflected in the interpretive metaphors of LLP as Starting Point, LLP as Neighborhood, and Female Engineers as Support System , the engineering LLP provides the women with opportunities to find STEM role models and see messages about women in STEM, aspects of the living environment that Ramsey et al. (2013) found an important aspect to create a welcoming living environment for wo men in engineering . The LLP in conjunction with the c ollege of e ngineering can provide additional resources in the form of access to tutors, role models, and additional training to assist the women in developing a sense of competence and self efficacy as a way to overcome stereotype threat (Steele, 1997). The present study provided data that allowed me to answer the research question posed in the study. In addition to the three significant findings, the present study has significance in the form of implic ations for theory, practice, and research. Implications for Theory The present study has implications for theory . The first implication is that metaphorical analysis is an appropriate method for conducting research under the constructivist theoretical perspective . Constructivists view i ndividual versions of knowledge as created by interactions between the interpretable (the existing world in a specific time and location) and our system for interpreting it (symbols, cultural mea nings, and language syste ms) (Schwandt, 1994) . Similarly, metaphors help the participant and the researcher connect a known concept to an unknown concept in order to explore, understand, and describe the unknown (Moring, 2001) . Constructivism making activ 1998, p. 58) . (Pitcher, 2013, p. 4) . As a constructivist research tool, metaphors allow the researcher to

PAGE 139

139 understand the concept being explored from the viewpoint of the participant while using an illustrative description that has shared meaning between the p articipant and the researcher. Co nstructivist s also acknowledge that multiple realities exist that are unique to the individual experience (Hatch, 2002) . Because making of their own experience is the source of understanding their development and the multiple realitie While constructivists understand the subjective nature of the individual meaning making process, they also acknowledge that personal and cultural identities can be understood among individuals who interact with the same surroundings (Lincoln & Guba, 2013). Thus, college students at the same institution may have similar mental constructs based on the ir interactions with each other and the same physical surroundings. M etaphors have been used in some research to understand the college student experience (e.g., Kochis & Gillespie, 2006 ; Longwell Grice & Kerr, 2013) , and the findings of the present study support the continued use of metaphors as a constructivist research tool to explore the experiences of students in higher education. Additionally, c onstructivism explores how individuals experience their own world through their vantage points and how thei r interactions with the world creates understanding and meaning (Hatch, 2002). Using metaphors as a constructivist research tool provides the opportunity to view the data as a whole and appreciate the experience from a different perspective (Carpenter, 20 08) . Because the current literature uses metaphors like the leaky pipeline and chilly climate to describe the experiences of female undergraduates in engineering from a negative viewpoint or a deficit model, the findings of the present study support the use of

PAGE 140

140 metaphors as a constructivist research tool to explore the experiences of female undergraduates in engineering using a different perspective and describe th em in a positive viewpoint or an advantage model. While all of the interpretive metaphors help answer the main research question of how the female participants describe their experience in an engineering LLP, the metaphors also provide additional depth to the research subquestions and connect to each of the two theoretical frameworks used in this study . The second implication of theory relates to of student involvement . In terms of th is theoretical framework, the subquestions are arr anged around the three most important forms of involvement described: academic work, faculty, and peers. The first research subquestion sought to understand how the participants use their LLP experience to describe their involvement in academics . In Asti academics included completing homework, doing class projects, and attending class . The interpretive metaphors of Engineering Classes as Challenges and Different as Normal provide insight into th is subquestion because t hese metap hors describe interactions the participants have within classrooms and within their scholastic endeavors. The second research subquestion sought to understand how the participants use their LLP experience as a lens to describe their involvement with facult y . While faculty member s were not mentioned often with the findings, the interpretive metaphor of Female Engineers as a Support System provides some insight to answer t his research subquestion . T his interpretive metaphor includes descriptions of role mod els, including faculty members and graduate teaching assistants. The third research subquestion sought to understand how the participants use their LLP experience as a lens to describe their involvement with peers . The interpretive metaphors of LLP

PAGE 141

141 as St arting Point, LLP as a Neighborhood, and Female Engineers as a Support System provide answers to th is subquestion . These interpretive metaphors include descriptions of interactions with other members of the engineering LLP and with other engineering undergraduate peers both inside the classroom and outside of it. involvement makes distinctions between the three most important forms of involvement in higher education . However , the findings of this study indicate that this dis tinction is less clearly defined for engineering students . For non engineering students, there may be two distinct groups of people with whom they study and socialize; however, the participants in this study seemed to have less distinction between the two groups . For instance, when asked about student organizations in which they were involved, the participants listed engineering based student organizations, and a majority of them only listed engineering based organizations . Additionally, when the partici pants were asked about who their social circles are , many mentioned fellow engineering classmates, fellow LLP residents, and/or members o f their research group (s) . Figure 2 1 illustrat es how the three main forms of in ter act with one another as three separate and unique forms of involvement ; however, findings of the present study contradicts this notion for engineering students . The fi n dings of the present study reflect that the social groups , the academic groups, and the interactions with faculty can be one in the same for engineering students involved in an engineering LLP . Instead of three different forms of student involvement, engineering students experience involvement as one activity with three closely related c omponents . F igure 5 1 represents an illustration of a conceptual model of engineering student involvement that displays a permeable distinction between the forms of in volvement as proposed by Astin.

PAGE 142

142 Figure 5 1. Conceptual model of engineering student involvement. This contradiction could reflect the experience of living in the engineering LLP . Students in LLPs have been shown to have greater academic and social involvement than their non participant peers (Inkelas & Weisman, 2003 ; McKelfresh, 1980 ) a nd are more likely to interact with faculty than non LLP students regardless of how involved in the LLP they are ( Garrett & Zabriski, 200 4 ). The findings of the present study could reflect that the participants of the engineering LLP are also experiencing the social, academic, and faculty student interactions benefits known to be common in LLPs. The last implication of theory relates to socialization . In terms of th is theoretical framework , the interpretive metaphor s of LLP as Starting Point and LLP as a Neighborhood connect most closely with the Social Normative Contexts of the Collegiate Experience socializing influence due to their description of the co curricular and social aspects of higher education . Conversel y, the interpretive metaphors of Engineering Classes as Challenges and Different as Normal more closely connect with the Academic Engineering Involvement Peers Academics Faculty

PAGE 143

143 Normative Contexts since they describe the curricular aspects of higher education and the behaviors within the classroom exper ience . The final interpretive metaphor of Female Engineers as a Support System connects with both the Social and the Academic Normative Contexts. s model, the S ocial and A cademic Normative Contexts were seen as separate but fluid compo nents of the Collegiate Experience socializing influence. The findings of this present study contradict this notion. The interpretive metaphors of the present study reflect that the social groups and academic groups of participants of an engineering LLP can be one in the same. This contradiction could reflect the experience of living in the engineering LLP . One of the goals of an LLP is to connect the in class a nd out of class learning for participants . The findings of the present study could reflect that th e LLP has been successful in reaching the goal of bridging the gap between the curricular and the co curricular components of higher education. students differ from other un dergraduate students in how the Collegiate Experience contributes to their socialization process or how the normative pressures interact with the socializing influences . If this difference does exist , th en it has implications for the socialization process of engineering students and suggests that a discipline based socialization process may need to be further explored. Implications for Practice The study of metaphors is concerned with how people understand their experiences . As a research tool, metaphors can provide a creative method to understand an experience . Using the interpretive experience, I developed implications to address individuals from various levels of academia and t he academic community . In terms of practice, this study may be significant for several campus

PAGE 144

144 constituencies or higher education practices . H ousing and residence life staff members, engineering faculty and staff, and other institutional faculty and staff who participate in collaborative efforts might benefit from the results of the study. Housing and residence life staff members The first group that might benefit from the findings is housing and residence life staff members . The LLP as a Starting Point interpretive metaphor describes how the women first met some of their classmates in the LLP; however, several of the women noted that not all of the women were in engineering or in other STEM disciplines . Coordinators of LLPs can work with marketing depar tments and housing assignments offices to better recruit incoming female engineering student to live within the LLP . Coordinators could also work with women in engineering program directors, engineering academic advisors, and officers of women in engineer ing student organizations as additional marketing sources to increase the number of engineering women living in the LLP. Housing staff might benefit from the findings in terms of maintenance, renovations, and construction . The LLP as a Neighborhood inter pretive metaphor discusses how some of the women used the community lounge spaces as social gathering spaces, but other women indicated they would find other spaces across campus to study because the common spaces were loud and distracting for quiet study . As renovations are made to current halls or as new halls are built, housing staff members can provide separate spaces on each floor for both social interactions and quiet study space . While the awareness of renovations cost is not a new thought (e.g., G ordon, 1974/2013), there has been a recent call to consider how housing facilities can align with the Stephens, Shushok, & Keith, 2013; Shushok et al. , 2013) . B y p roviding separate spaces for social interactions and academic pursuits, the engineering LLP would increase the opportunities

PAGE 145

145 for the women to interact with one another in a variety of ways and possibly decrease the number of women who experienced the Neigh borhood interpretive metaphor theme of LLP as a building that only met physiological needs. College of e ngineering faculty and staff members Another group that might benefit from the findings is college of engineering faculty and staff. The Different as N ormal interpretive metaphor describes how the women were aware that they were a minority in engineering because they saw few other women within their engineering courses . Directors of w omen in engineering programs could develop partnerships with one anoth er to provide more opportunities for the women involved in their programs to interact with wo men in engineering student organizations and with LLPs . These partnerships would allow the women to see other engineering women so they could be reminded that the y are not alone, and the partnerships would have the added benefit of reducing costs for events since space could be provided free within the LLP and the other costs could be shared among the partnering groups. College of engineering faculty and staff migh t benefit from the findings in terms of the tenure and promotion policy . The Female Engineers as a Support System interpretive metaphor describes the value that women engineering students gain from interacting with other women engineers . In order to enco urage and reward women engineering faculty to provide this type of support for engineering students, college deans and academic affairs staff should consider support for the engineering LLP as service in the tenure and promotion process. Groups involved in collaborative efforts The final group that might benefit from the findings is those groups involved in collaborative efforts . The findings may help staff members who work in the LLP and who provid e educational activities and events for the residents . Th e LLP as a Starting Point interpretive

PAGE 146

146 are exposed to opportunities within the c ollege of e ngineering . The women described the events that focused on social opportunities or involvement opportunities, but some of the women indicated a desire for something more technical . Lizzie described it best when she said, I feel like one thing that could have been kind of leveraged more by having us all there is giving us more exposure to a lot of the technological side of engineering . It was very we were exposed to societies and classes, but I feel like they could have lab, just for fun. This quote indicates that the staff members who develop activities could use the findings to provide some opportunities for exposure to the more academic side of engineering, including research and technology . Additionally, this implication relies on the involvemen t of engineering faculty and staff to volunteer to present or assist with these activities. Those groups involved in collaborative efforts gain another implication for practice from the findings of this study based on the Female Engineers as a Support Syst em interpretive metaphor . Within this metaphor, the participants indicated a sense of unity they felt with other women engineers . LLP coordinators can work to find partners in industry, faculty, graduate students, and upper class students to serve as men tors and role models for the women in the engineering LLP . These partnerships can be done through formal mentoring programs or through informal interactions and activities . The exact format is less important than the opportunity for the LLP participants to gain a sense of support, encouragement, and inspiration Finally, there is an overall implication that this study brings to light for LLP coordinators and enginee ring faculty members . Often the focus of academic affairs student affairs partnerships is on the administrative and programmatic aspects . Because meaningful assessment is necessary for effective academic affairs student affairs partnership programs (Whit t, et al., 2008) and t here is a need to empirically test the outcomes of participation within LLPs (Inkelas,

PAGE 147

147 2008), LLP coordinators and engineering education researchers and faculty members can also develop partnerships to conduct research . These researc h partnerships can help expand knowledge about engineering LLPs and would broaden the information available about engineering LLPs in both the engineering education lit erature and the student affairs literature. Implications for Research The present study also has implications for future research . For example, this study explores the experiences of female students in an engineering LLP . It is possible that these experiences are not unique to women involved in a LLP . Future studies might explore the exper iences of female engineering students who do not live in a LLP and compare them to those of students who do live in a LLP . Such a study would fill a gap in the literature. The present study explored the experiences of female students in an engineering LLP who lived in a coed hall . To further explore the experiences of female students in an engineering LLP, future studies might explore the experiences of an all female engineering LLP . A qualitative study on the experiences of students in an all female eng ineering LLP would contribute to the body of knowledge about experiences students are having while a part of the LLP and expand knowledge about engineering LLPs. Furthermore, the present study explored the experiences of female students in an engineering LLP at one institution . Future studies might use qualitative methodology to conduct a multi institutional study . T his qualitative study may produce findings that will help institutions develop strategies and support services to enhance the experiences of engineering women in LLPs. Future scholars might also wish to explore whether the experiences of women who live in an engineering LLP differ from the experiences of men who live in an engineering LLP . The use of a constructivist approach to explore the e xperiences of men in engineering LLPs may produce

PAGE 148

148 findings that will help institutions develop strategies and support services to enhance the experiences of engineering men in LLPs . Such a study would broaden the information available about engineering LL Ps. Future researchers might wish to investigate whether a certain type of female engineering student is more likely to live in an engineering LLP . A future study could focus on the demographics of female students involved in an engineering LLP . The stu dy could use a disciplinary model (i.e., engineering programs with a large percentage of women enrolled versus engineering programs with a small percentage of women enrolled) to explore the disciplines of the students likely to be involved . Whether using a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods research design, this study could make comparisons between the engineering disciplines . Such a study would broaden the information about engineering student involvement in LLPs. The present study explored the experiences of female students in an engineering LLP using a constructivist theoretical perspective . Because a possible barrier to retaining women in STEM includes institutional issues like sexism and inequitable opportunities (Linley & George Jackson, 20 13), future researchers may wish to use a feminist research lens . Because feminist research seeks to promote systematic change by highlighting the experiences of women on issues of inequality (Grbich, 2007), a feminist lens would bring new insight into the experiences of women in an engineering LLP. This research could explore ways in which to develop the LLP as an initiative to increase participation of women in engineering while also addressing climate issues (Linley & George Jackson, 2013). Finally, future scholars might conduct a longitudinal study of women involved in an engineering LLP . however, the number of semesters the women lived within the LLP varied . A longitudinal s tudy

PAGE 149

149 conducted with the same women in the same LLP could examine why some women choose to stay in the LLP and wh y some women choose to leave the LLP . This qualitative study could be coupled with a positivist study using quantitative methods to examine the differences between those who stay and those who leave . A comparative study between the experiences of women who stay for multiple years in an engineering LLP and those who leave after one year would contribute to the body of knowledge about the benefits of LLPs. Limitations of the Study As with all research, the present study had limitations . The first dealt with the sample . This study focus ed on the experiences of students at one institution; thus, the findings may not be transferrable to all such stu dents within four year institut ions nationwide. The findings provide snapshots of the aspects inherent to this group of students at the time during which this study w as conducted. The second limitation also dealt with the sample . This study focused solely on the experiences of women who participated in the engineering LLP. It is likely that men who participated in the engineering LLP may have different experiences. Additionally, members of ethnic or racial minority backgrounds who participated in the engineering LLP may have different experiences when viewed as a demographic subset. Because only participants were interviewed, non ere not be reflected in this study. Another limitation comes from the difference in gend er between myself as the researcher and the gender of the participants . Reinharz and Chase (2003) note that when men study women, then, the same general methodological principle applies as when women study women: It is crucial that the researcher take ac co u nt of his or relationship . (p. 85)

PAGE 150

150 While I took steps to build rapport with the participants, it is unclear as to whether the fact that I am a man interviewing women participa nts had any effect discu ss freely and talk openly about their experiences . If this gender difference had an effect on the relationship, then the findings of this study might have provided different results had there not been a gender difference between interviewer and participant. A fourth limitation dealt with the data collection method . The use of semi structured interviews allows the participants to describe their e xperience in their own words . Because this constant; rather, they evolve, influenced by subs e provide truths of personal po sitionality and subjectivity (Reissman, 2003) . For instance, if participants only provided positive accounts of their experience, then the findings of this study might have provided different results if they had also included negative accounts. Another l imitation comes from the structure of the LLP involved in the study . Although LLPs exist in European countries and within Islamic educational systems in t he form of residential colleges where faculty are more integrated into the LLP (Penven et al., 2013 ) , the present study explored an LLP with an Americanize d learning community structure ( Soldner & Szelenyi, 2008 ). Within this context, faculty members have a limited role within the community in the form of infrequent presentations or when 1 2 faculty memb ers serve on the LLP advisory board . The use of a LLP with a more residential college structure might have provided different findings related to faculty involvement . Additionally, an LLP with a residential college structure might have made the findings more transferable to non American institutions.

PAGE 151

15 1 The final limitation dealt with the data analysis method . The combining of the metaphorical into reconstructed interpretive metaphor s is a c omplex process . A s Came ron et al. (2009) noted, the grouping process involves imagination and creativity in describing how metaphors best fit together . Because of this and because of the dynamic nature of language in use, the groupings that we construct will inevitably have blurred boundaries and a degree of overla p (p. 76). To answer the research question, I used conventional metaphors, metaphors used rou tinely by the participants, or creative metaphor s to create th e interpretive metaphor s; however, a multiplici ty of possible interpretations could exist when metap hors are viewed as linguistic devices to connect unknown to known and the researcher to shape interactions with the findings and research texts. By addressing the limitations of this study, I am attempting to ensure that this study is not interpreted beyond the bounds of the seven participants; however, the limitations are only a very small part of the overall study . Although the present study had several limitations, the study was worthwhile in spite of t hem . The results of the study expanded the body of literature on the engineering LLPs and the body of literature on women's involvement in engineering LLPs. Conclusions As more institutions develop LLPs, the need for more information and research on the experiences of students within the programs will increase . There is a need to empirically test the outcomes of participation within LLPs using a variety of methods (quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods) . This study should be seen as a step furth er in understanding the student experiences within a LLP. Women in engineering LLPs are a population that has not been widely studied . Because there is underrepresentation of women in STEM majors and because participation in a LLP

PAGE 152

152 appears to be related to success in the first year, it is important to understand what experiences students are having while a part of the LLP . The present study addresses the gap in the existing literature on LLPs by using qualitative methodology to describe the experiences o f female students in an engineering LLP. In conclusion, it appears that the women involved in engineering LLPs feel they gain an edge or better footing because of their involvement . This edge is both social through the friendships they make and academic through the connections to fellow engineering students and the c ollege of e ngineering activities . This finding reflects some of the intended purposes and roles of LLPs within higher e ducation. Furthermore, the present study suggests that women majoring in engineering face challenges but they still enjoy their major despite these challenges . As Bess described it, Just take everything we said into account because a lot of everything, e ven though . ng to be in The women understand that the challenge of engineering as a major is one part of a larger picture. Finally, the findings of this study confirm the notion that women in engineering provide support for one another . For the w omen who participate in an engineering LLP, this support starts within the residence hall; however, the support does not stop there . Whether they serve as role models, mentors, research team leaders, or instructors, female engineers provide support and en couragement to each other throughout their college careers . While the numbers of women in engineering remains low, it is likely that this support continues throughout their careers . The findings of this study support the notion that one of the best metho ds of encouraging and retaining women engineers is through the support of fellow women engineers.

PAGE 153

153 APPENDIX A IRB DOCUMENTATION UFIRB 02 Social & Behavioral Research Protocol Submission Form This form must be typed. Send this form and the supporting documents to IRB02, PO Box 112250, Gainesville, FL 32611. Should you have questions about completing this form, call 352 392 0433. Title of Protocol: Engineering Living Learning Program Principal Investigator: Cliff Haynes UFID #: Degree / Title: M.A.Ed., Doctoral candidate in Higher Education Administration Mailing Address: Email : cliffh@ufl.edu Department: School of human development and organizational studies in education Telephone #: Co Investigator(s): UFID#: Email: Supervisor (If PI is student) : Dale Campbell UFID# : Degree / Title: Ph.D., Professor Mailing Address: 2 29 A Norman Hall, PO BOX 11704 9 Email : Department: School of human development and organizational studies in education Telephone #: Date of Proposed Research: 10 / 15 /201 3 10 / 14 /201 4 Source of Funding (A copy of the grant proposal must be submitted with this protocol if funding is involved): Unfunded Scientific Purpose of the Study: learning program.

PAGE 154

154 Describe the Research Methodology in Non Technical Language: ( Explain what will be done with or to the research participant. ) This project is a dissertation study under the supervision of Dr. Dale Campbell. P articipants will be purposively selected based on the following criteria: (1) be a female stude nt, (2) have lived at least one semester in the engineering livi ng learning program , and (3) be currently enrolled as a student in the College of En gineering. Individual interviews will be conducted on UF campus by the researcher and last approximately 60 m inutes. Interviews will be audio recorded and transcribed. The interview guide is attached. All identifiers will be removed from transcripts and each participant will be as signed a pseudonym. Data or findings will not be linked to identifiers. Describe Potential Benefits: U pon completion of the first interview, participants will receive a $20 gift card to either the University Bookstore or Gator Dining Services for participating. The data collected may also have significance for future practice, research, and policy. Describe Potential Risks: ( If risk of physic al, psychological, or economic harm may be involved, describe the steps taken to protect participant.) This study will only involve no more than minimal risk for the participants. Describe How Participant(s) Will Be Recruited : Participants have to be over 18 years old, be current full time students of the University of Florida, and have lived at least one semester live in the engineering living learning program . Participants will be recruited by email (see the recruitment transc ript attached) using criterion sampling. Administrative secretaries in the D epartment of H ousing and Residence Education will forward the recruitment email to resident email addresses. Potential participants are asked to contact the primary investigator if they are interested in participating in the study. The primary investigator will then contact the participants to schedule interviews . Maximum Number of Participants (to be approached with consent) 400 Age Range of Participants: 18+ Amount of Compensation/ course credit: Participants will receive a $20 gift card Describe the Informed Consent Process. (Attach a Copy of the Informed Consent Document . See http://irb.ufl.edu/irb02/samples.html for examples of consent.) An informed consent form will be provided to participants prior t o the interviews . Participation is completely voluntary. (SIGNATURE SECTION)

PAGE 155

155 Principal Investigator(s) Signature: Date: Co Investigator(s) Signature(s): Date: Date: Department Chair Signature: Date:

PAGE 156

156 APPENDIX B RECRUITMENT EMAIL Hello, My name is Cliff Haynes, and I am a current doctoral candidate in the Higher Education Administration department. As part of doctoral dissertation, I am seeking to interview [the university] female students who live in the Engineering Living Learning Community. The purpose of this study is to periences in an engineering living learning program. Each participant will be asked to participate in 2 individual interviews that will each last about one hour. U pon completion of the first interview, you will receive a $20 gift card to either the [the un iversity] Bookstore or Dining Services. If you are interested in participating in a n interview , please reply as soon as possible to Cliff Haynes at cliffh@ufl.edu . Thank you for your consideration.

PAGE 157

157 APPENDIX C INTERVIEW PROTOCOL First Interview guide I want to talk to you about your perceptions of life in the engineering living learning community. I would like to know how you describe the experience and how experience influences your academic and personal lives. I would like to ask you few questions. 1. To get started, what prompted you to live in the engineering LLP? 2. How would describe life in the engineering LLP? a. Follow up if needed: Describe a typical week for me. 3. Tell me about an experience within the LLP that led you to feel more connected to the College of Engineering. a. Follow up if needed: Tell me about an activity, person, or group that has helped you be a successful engineering student. 4. and what do you typically do together? a. Follow up if needed: Describe an experience you have had with other engineering students because of your participation in the LLP? b. Follow up if needed: Tell me about an instance when someone in the LLP (RA, Peer mento r, other resident, roommate) helped you meet your academic goals. 5. member because of your participation in the LLP? a. Follow up if needed: How would you describe the faculty i n the College of Engineering? 6. Overall, how would you describe life as a female engineering student? 7. Complete this statement: Living in the engineering LLP is like ______. 8. Is there anything else you would like to share about your experience that we have not touched upon today? Thank you for your time.

PAGE 158

158 Second Interview guide take some time to look at some portions of the transcripts and reflect my initial findings. 1. Since we talked last is there something else that you would like to share about ________? 2. experience of women in an engineering LLP? 3. What aspects of the findings do you agree or disagree with? 4. Of the m describes your experience in the engineering LLP? And how? 5. Is there a missing metaphor that describes your experience in the engineering LLP that you think should be added? If so, which on e? 6. Is there anything else you would like to share about your experience that we have not discussed in these two interviews? Thank you for your time.

PAGE 159

159 APPENDIX D SAMPLE INFORMED CONSENT Informed Consent Protocol Title: The in an Engineering Living Learning Program Please read this consent document carefully before you decide to participate in this study. Purpose of the research study: experiences in an engineering living learning program. What you will be asked to do in the study: To participate in an individual interview led by a graduate student. Time required: Approximately 60 minutes Risks and Benefits: This study will only involve no more than minimal risk for the participants. While there are no direct benefits for the participants, the data collected may have significance for future practice, research, and policy. Compensation : Participants will receive a $20 gift card to either the University Bookstore or Gator Dining Services for participating. Confidentiality: Your identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. The names of the participants will not be used in any research reports or presentations. Your name will not be connected to your resp onses once our interview i s over. The final results will be used in a written study for dissertation purposes and might be sent to education journals and magazines for possible publication or used in presentations . Volunt ary participation: Your participation in this study is completely voluntary . There is no penalty for not p articipating. Your decision whether to participate will not affect your resident status in university housing. Right to withdraw from the study: You have the right to withdraw fro m the study at any time without consequence. You do not have to answer any questions you do not want to answer. Whom to contact if you have questions about the study: Cliff Haynes Whom to contact about your rights as a resear ch participant in the study: UFIRB Office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611 2250; ph 392 0433. I have read the procedure outlined above. I voluntarily agree to participate in this study and have received a copy of this description . _____________________________________ ______________________________ _____________________________________ ______________________________

PAGE 160

160 APPENDIX E V ITY JOURNAL Participant #1: Carrie Carrie was very short in her discussion, although she used some imagery in her interview . In dealing with being one of the few women in electrical engineering, she used images of fighting, finding the experience as a battle to overcome. Themes: Battle This was also involved in her social/living situation when discussing her experience in the hall . The me: Problem When she started describing the women in [the engineering LLP] , she used phrases like describe both the geographical location of the women on the ha ll as well as their involvement on the floor . Involvement was not something that was automati cally given because of where you lived . Instead, it was an active choice that the women made in order to participate. Theme: Community membership After the rec class schedule. Theme: Freedom One finding that I did not expect as much was that there was less of a separation between academic and social lives . The two were greatly int ertwined. Between these two interviews, I added additional probing questions that came up during the first interview . These included: Tell me about a social experience you have had with the women of the engineering LLP. What made the experience with classes a good/bad one? What made the experience with professors or TAs a good/bad one? Describe any experiences you have had with female mentors/role models in the field of engineering. plete this statement: Part of my research is examining the metaphors that are used to describe the experiences of female engineering students . As you think about your experience, can you please compare this experi ence to another experience that you have had. Participant #2: Sharon Sharon was very talkative and her passion for the engineering field was very evident . However, her experience in the engineering LLP was less involved than the previous participant . Sh e did describe the positive experience of the engineering LLP has informing her through the use of

PAGE 161

161 event publicity . Themes: Entry point Sharon had a very positive experi ence with one of the housing peer mentor staff who assisted her with studying. Sharon provided a metaphor that spoke to being a female engineer . fferent way. Theme: Being Different Similar to Carrie , I noticed that there was not much of a separation between academic lives and social lives . Sharon Participant #3: Marie Christine Simil ar to Sharon , Marie Christine was less involved in the engineering LLP; however, she described the engineering community as a good experience . While she was never as involved in the floor on the larger scale, Marie Christine seemed to appreciate the individual one on one opportunities the LLP offered . one. Themes: Community Marie Christine was less involved in the College of Engineering . To describe it, she used me . Even though she was involved in several student organizations and in research, she did not mention these opportunities as being ways to connect her to the larger colle ge. While Marie Christine had joined a few of the student organizations, she had not found them to be as important as the interactions she had with the other individual members . This focus on individual interactions also came out of her description with a faculty member . She had positive interactions with a faculty member that gave one on one time and involvement with her as an individual , even though it was a large class. Theme: Individual Interactions Marie Christine had some very interesting takes on being a female engineer . She admitted having a professor who made sexist remarks during class, but that it did not faze her . She used Theme: Being Different Like Sharon , Marie Christine also had experience doing research . However, Marie Christine found it surprising that many of her lab partners were all female . This seemed to take her by surprise and even made her question her worth: did she get the position because of her talent or because of her sex ? In describing this different for her and it seemed to take some adjusting to it.

PAGE 162

162 When asked to give a metaphor, she provided [the engineering LLP] Participant #4: Ruth Ruth is unique in that between scheduling the interview and actually conducting the interview, Ruth had switc hed majors from engineering to Computer Science. Ruth reflected a similar theme of membership . A phrase description that was used by the women . This again reflects the image ry of those who are involved members and those who are not . Her description Theme: Membership In describing classes and challenges, she used some language of difficulty includ Theme: Difficulty In determining her new major, Ruth phrases that reflected a sense of certainty about the decision . When discussing this change of major, Ruth smiled more and her tone was happier and upbeat which reflected a positive view to that direction and sense of certainty that was not present when she was discussing her experience with engineering. Theme: Direct ion, Certainty Like Sharon , Ruth mentioned that the experience in [the engineering LLP] Ruth mentioned that she and other female engineers are aware that there are not as many female engineers, and yet the experience of living with other engineers made that seem less abnormal and more standard . While Ruth noted this difference, she had little other descriptions of being a female engineering student . In describing her experience in classes or with professors, she rarely noted the experience of being a female as something she noticed, was aware of, or even thought about. Theme: Being Different Participant #5: Lizzie Lizzie mentioned several times about the impact of ext ernal forces likes mentors or student Theme: External Forces Similar to other participants, Lizzie spent time discussing her role within student organizations . However, Lizzie , who is Hispanic, also mentioned portion of ethnicity or culture also having an impact on her involvement . There were several mentions of diversity (or lack thereof), and how this lack of diversity led with others. Theme: Diversity

PAGE 163

163 In describing [the engineering LLP] , Lizzie used several metaphors describing a family Theme: Family When discussing the impact of being a female had on her academic career, Lizzie used direction. Theme: Direction Lizzie also discussed the role of [the engineering LLP] on connecting her to the college of engineering . Through conversations with other female students in the floor lounge, she would learn about other opportunities and events in the college . Through interacting with them, she would make connections with cl assmates that she was not aware they shared the same class . However, Lizzie made most of these connections through unplanned, spontaneous interactions and rarely attending planned events . This included conversing with her Peer Mentor while both were maki ng tea in the floor lounge. Theme: Unplanned Connections Participant # 6: Bess Like several of the participants before her, Bess used the term buckle down to describe being serious about classes and homework . She used this term several times in describin g the need to force herself to do the work. Theme: Serious Business When asked to describe how her male classmates responded to her being in engineering classes, Bess noted that her classmates seemed not to have any real reaction to the fact that she was a woman . Instead, she found that it was older adults who seemed to make a bigger deal out of it . Theme: Being Different Unlike most of the other participants before her, Bess noted that she was involved in other student organizations outside of engineering . She also went on to describe positive interactions with her RA, with her academic advisor, and with a male professor who held study sessions outside of the classroom; however, she noted that she had not yet had a female professor. Theme: Support Participant # 7 : Billie Billie is unique because she has several roles within the engineering LLP . She is both an engineering student and an RA staff member . Unlike the other participants , Billie did not first choose to live in the engineering LLP . Instead, she was assigned to live there as part of her role as an RA. When describing her experience in the hall, Billie used several phrases like open and chill to denote a very relaxed atmos phere . another inside the hall lounge space Theme: Interactive Community

PAGE 164

164 Billie spent a lot of the time discussing interacting with males in engineering . This included male classmates, male professors , and male engineers in industry . Many of these experiences were negative in nature, and these experiences led her to better appreciate her experiences with other female engineers. Theme: Outsider Participant #4: Ruth Follow up Upon being presented with my data so far, Ruth agreed with the presented metaphors . She saw her experience reflected in the Starting Point, Challenging Classes, and Different as Normal metaphors . While she understood the Neighborhood metaphor, she commen ted that she did not necessarily see it reflective of her experience . I will need to strengthen the opposing viewpoint of this metaphor to reflect [the engineering LLP] as a living space but not necessarily an interactive community space. I also discusse d the fifth metaphor about Female Engineers as _________. I believe this is a metaphor reflective of their experience, but I am struggling to find the exact wording. Possibilities include comrade, teammate, support system, or fellow traveler (using the pat h metaphor). Ruth agreed with me that it is present but not necessarily the same as the Neighborhood metaphor. Participant #3: Marie Christine Follow up Upon being presented with my data so far, Marie Christine agreed with the presented metaphors. She sa w her experience reflected in the Starting Point, Neighborhood, and Different as Normal metaphors. While she understood the Neighborhood metaphor, she commented that she agreed with the second portion of it that she saw the community existed but did not sp ecifically participate in it. Marie Christine agrees with the Different as Normal metaphor, but only when it is not used as a way to draw attention to differences. In her view, differences come because of viewpoints and strengths, not because of gender, race, or background. She told a story of a career showcase viewing a problem and managing people. The strongest difference between Marie Christine and others comes in two areas. The first is that Marie Christine does not see classes as challenges or hard. She agreed that classes required work (the third theme of the Challenging Classes metaphor), but she did not see this as problematic. The second area is th at Marie Christine does not draw strength from female bonding but instead draws it from the bonds of engineers in general. Marie Christine view of engineering and does not see any difference between a female engineer or a mal e engineer; each can assist each other and each can support each other. In this light, Marie Christine does not go out of her way to find fellow female engineers, but supports (and finds support) from any person around her. During the interview, she gave a story of chatting with Marie Christine does not see a

PAGE 165

165 Participant # 1 : Car rie Follow up Upon being presented with my data so far, Carrie agreed with each of the presented metaphors. She saw her experience reflected in each of them and expanded on or provided additional metaphors or stories as exemplars. For instance, she mentio When I presented the fifth metaphor of Women as Support System, Carrie completely agreed. her four metaphors. It was a common theme that ran through all of the other ones, and she commented words of wisdom that I definitely needed to know in order to reflect her experience, Carrie said that the Support System must be a part of the description. Given her take on the support system metaphor, I will be asking others how they view this metaphor and if they view it as a completely separate metaphor or as a separate metaphor that is also a common theme throughout all of the other ones. Participant # 5 : Lizzie Follow up Like the other women so far, Lizzie agreed with each of the presented metaphors. She saw her experience reflected in the chosen metaphors . When I presented the fifth metaphor on Women as a Support System, she agreed that gaining the network of women was her starting point into engineering. Like Carrie , Lizzie believes the Support System metaphor is present in the other four metaphors, or as other four. When I asked her about any last items, Lizzie provided one implication for future practice. She commented that the LLP does a great job introducing the women to each o ther and to the college/university. However, Lizzie felt that the missing piece that the LLP could improve upon introducing them to items like 3D printing and micro lab. In her view, this would have completed the full picture of life as a female engineer. Participant # 6: Bess Follow up Once again, Bess agreed with each of the metaphors. The one metaphor that seemed to ring the truest for her was the challenging courses metaphor. Perhaps this was because she had just come out of an exam, but she also discussed other courses as well. She expanded on the into the deep end. You eith future practice. During the d iscussion on the support system metaphor, she expanded on the idea o

PAGE 166

166 The final important takeaway from Bess was that regardless of the challenges or the differences, love it, we would Participant #2: Sharon Follow up Sharon seemed to agree with each of the presented metaphors, but she made some recommendations for counter narratives. Within the Challenging Classes metaphor, Sharon commented that the presented summary does classes were not a challenge. While she agreed with the competition and obstacle portions of the metaphor and she agreed with the overall metaphor, she knew some women that would disagree. For the Different as Normal metaphor, Sharon agreed more with the second aspect of Different but Equal. She recognized her own quote (marker in a crayon box), and noted that while the summary has it listed as a unity portion exemplar , she felt it was more representative of th e Different but Equal portion of the metaphor. Sharon definitely believed that the fifth metaphor of Women Engineers as a Support System deserved to be its own metaphor. When I commented that others discussed it being an umbrella metaphor or a common thre ad metaphor, she agreed that it could be presented in one of those Sharon mentioned something that could be a possible counter narrative or limitation to the study when we discussed the role model aspect . Because I was only interviewing women that the role models or sense of community were only women because that is all the participants interact with in the engineering LLP. When asked to comment on any missing pieces, Sharon instance , she commented that discussions of roommate relationships and friendships with non engineering women might not be reflected in the presented model.

PAGE 167

167 REFERENCES Altheide, D. L., & Johnson, J. M. (1994). Criteria for assessing interpretive validity in qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 485 499). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Anthony, L. J., Palius, M. F., Maher, C. A., & Moghe, P. V. (2007). Using discourse analysis to study a cross disciplinary learning community: Insights from an IGERT training program. Journal of Engineering Education, 96 , 141 156. Arboleda, A., Wang, Y., Shelley, II, M. C., & Whalen, D. F. (2003). Predictors of residence hall involvement. J ournal of College Student Development, 44 (4), 517 531. doi: 10.1353/csd/2003.0036 Arminio J. L., & Hultgren, F. H. (2002). Breaking out from the shadow: The question of criteria in qualitative research. Journal of College Student Development, 43 (4), 446 460. Armstrong, S. L., Davis, H. S., & Paulson, E. J. (2011). The subjectivity problem: Improving triangulatio n approaches in metaphor analysis studies. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 10 (2), 151 163. Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 25 , 297 308. Astin, A. W. (1996). Involvement in Learning revisited: Lessons we have learned. Journal of College Student Development, 37 (2), 123 134. Baum, S., Ma, J., & Payea, K. (2010). Education pays 2010: The benefits of higher education for individuals and society . Retrieve d from the College Board website: http://trends.collegeboard.org Bergvall, V. L., Sorby, S. A., & Worthern, J. B. (1994). Thawing the freezing climate for women in engineering education: View from both sides of the desk. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 1 , 323 346. Bernard, H. R., & Ryan, G. W. (2010). Analyzing qualitative data: Systematic approaches. Los Angeles: Sage. Beutel, A. M., & Nelson, D. J. (2005). The gender and race ethnicity of faculty in top science and engineering research departments. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 11 (4), 389 401. Bieri Buschor, C. B., Berwerger , S., Frei , A. K., & Kappler, C. (2014). Majoring in STEM What The Journal of Educational Research, 107 , 167 176. doi: 10.1080/00220671.2013.788989

PAGE 168

168 Blackhurst, A. E., Akey, L. D., & Bobilya, A. J. (2003). A qualitative investigations of student outcomes in a residential learning community. Journal of the First Year Experience, 15 (2), 35 59. Blansett, S. C. (2010). A history of University of Florida residence facilities (Rev. 3 rd ed.). University of Florida De partment of Housing and Residence Education. Retrieved from http://www.housing.ufl.edu/media/about/aboutus.historybookpdf.pdf Blickenstaff , J. C. (2005). Women and science careers: Leaky pipeline or gender filter. Gender and Education, 17 (4), 369 386 . doi: 10.1080/09540250500145072 Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (5 th ed.) . Boston : Allyn and Bacon. Brainard, S. G., & Ailes Sengers, L. (1994). Mentoring female engineers: A mode l program at the University of Washington. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 1 , 123 135. Brandon, A., Hirt, J. B., & Cameron, T. (2008). Where you live influences who you know: Differences in student interaction based on residence hall design. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 35 (2) , 62 79. Brower, A. M. (2008). More like a home than a hotel: the impact of living learning programs on college high risk drinking. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 35 (1), 32 49. Brower, A. M., Golde, C. M., & Allen, C. (2003). Residential learning communities positively affect college binge drinking. NASPA J ournal, 40 (3), 132 152. Brown, G. & Devlin, A. S. (2003). Vandalism: Environmental and social factors. Journal of College Student Development 44 (4), 502 516. Cameron, L., Maslen, R., Todd, Z., Maule, J., Stratton, P., & Stanley, N. (2009). The discourse dy namics approach to metaphor and metaphor led discourse analysis. Metaphor and Symbol, 24 (2), 63 78. doi: 10.1080/10926480902830821 Camp, A. G., Gilleland, D. G. & Pearson, C., & Putten. J. V. (2009). Differentiating between women in hard and soft science a nd engineering disciplines. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, theory, and practice, 11 (3), 363 384. Campbell, G., Jr. (2002). Changing assumptions about who can learn. New Directions for Higher Education, 119 , 23 28. Carpenter, J. (2008). Met aphors in qualitative research: shedding light or casting shadow . Research in Nursing & Health, 31, 274 282. doi: 10.1002/nur.20253

PAGE 169

169 Castro, Erin L. (2012). How we t alk ab out s tudents m atter: Reframing d eficit d iscourses of u nder represented s tudents in ST EM. Project STEP UP. University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. Retrieved from http://stepup.education.illinois.edu/sites/default/files/Final%20DRAFT%20 %20DAH%20 %20STEP%20UP%20Deficit%20Discourses.pdf Chavez, C. (2008). Conceptualizing from the inside: Advantages, complications, and demands on insider positionality. The Qualitativ e Report, 13 (3), 474 494. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR13 3/chavez.pdf Cho, J., & Trent, A. (2006). Validity in qualitative research revisited. Qualitative research, 6 (3), 319 3 40. doi: 10.1177/1468794106065006 Clarke, J. H., Miser, K. M., & Roberts, A. O. (1988). Freshman residential programs: Effects of living learning structure, faculty involvement and thematic focus. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 18 (2), 7 13. Cohen, A. M. (1998). The shaping of American higher education: Emergence and growth of the contemporary system. San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers. College Board. (2010). 2010 college bound seniors: Total group profile report . College Board. Retrie ved from http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/2010 total group profile report cbs.pdf Corbin Dwyer, S., & Buckle, J. L., (2009). The s pace between: On being an insider outsider in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8 (1), 54 63. Retrieved from http://ejournals.li brary.ualberta.ca/index.php/IJQM/article/download/2981/5198 Cox, B. E., & Orehovec, E. (2007). Faculty student interaction outside the classroom: A typology of a residential college. The Review of Higher Education, 30 (4), 343 362. doi: 10.1353/rhe.2007.003 3 Creswell, J. W. (2011). E ducational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research ( 4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative i nquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39 (3), 124 130. doi : 10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2 Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process . London: SAGE. Daemple, P. A. (2003 2004). An analysis of the high attritio n rates among first year college science, math and engineering majors. Journal of College Student Retention, 5 (1), 37 52. Daves, G. D., Jr. (2002). The national context for reform. New Directions for Higher Education, 119 , 9 14.

PAGE 170

170 Domizi, D. P. (2008). Student perceptions about their informal learning experiences in a first year residential learning community. Journal of the First Year Experience & Students in Transition, 20 (1), 97 110. Duderstadt, J. (2008). Engineering for a chang ing world: A roadmap to the future of engineering practice, research, and education. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan. Retrieved from the Millennium Project website: http://milproj.ummu.umich.edu/publications/EngFlex%20report/download/EngFlex%20 Report.pdf Edwards, K. E., & McKelfresh, D. A. (2002). The impact of a l academic success and persistence. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 43 (3) , 395 402. Ellett, T., & Schmidt, A. (2011). Faculty perspectives on creating community in residence halls. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 38 (1) , 26 39. Eshbaugh, E. M. (2008). Brief Report: Gender, social support, and loneliness among residence hall students. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 35 (2) , 24 33. Fitzgerald, L. E. (1974). The future for college residence halls. In D.A. DeCoster & P. Mable (Eds.), Student development and education in college residence halls (p. 267 278). Washington, D. C.: ACPA. Fitzpatrick, K. (2011). Swimming in unchartered waters: Understanding and developing the facult y role in residential education. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 38 (1) , 70 79. Garrett, M. D., & Zabriskie, M. S. (200 4 ). The influence of living learning participation on student faculty interaction. Journal of College and University St udent Housing, 3 3 ( 1 ) , 38 44. George Jackson, C. E. (2011). STEM switching: Examining departures of undergraduate women in STEM fields. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 17 (2), 149 171. George Jackson, C. E. (2014). Undergraduate w NASPA Journal About Women in Higher Education, 7 (1), 96 119. doi: 10.1515/njawhe 2014 0006 Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report , 8 (4), 597 606. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR8 4/golafshani.pdf Golde, C. M., & Pribbenow, D. A. (2000). Understanding faculty involvement in living learning programs. Journal of College Student Development, 41 (1), 27 40.

PAGE 171

171 STEM fields. NASPA Journal About Women in Higher Education, 5 (2), 115 140. doi: 10.1515/njawhe 2012 1098 Good, J., Halp in, G., & Halpin, G. (2001 2002). Retaining black students in engineering: Do minority programs have a longitudinal impact? Journal of College Student Retention, 3 (4), 351 364. Gordon, S. S. (20 13 ). Living and learning in college . Journal of College and Un iversity Student Housing, 3 9 (2) , 1 04 113. (Reprinted from The Journal of General Education , pp. 235 245, by S. S. Gordon, 1974 , Penn State University Press, http://www.jstor.org/stable/27796392 ). Grbich, C. (2007). Qualitative data analysis: An introduction. London: Sage Publications. Hall, R. M., & Sandler, B. R. (1982). The classroom climate: A chilly one for women. Washington, D. C.: Project on the Status and Education of Women, Association of American Colleges. HE 013 989 (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 215 628). Hargrave, A. (2002). Faculty and residence life staff involvement in learning communities i n five Midwestern public universities. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 30 (2) , 17 21. Hatch, A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in educational settings . Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Haynes, C., Bulosan, M., Citty, J. , Harris, M. G., Hudson, J., & Koro Ljungberg, M. (2012). My being. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 1 17. Retrieved from http://ijds.org/Volume7/IJDSv7p001 017Haynes329.pdf Haynes, C., & Janosik, S. M. (2012). Faculty and staff benefits from involvement in living learning programs. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 38 (2), 32 45. Retrieved from http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/acuho/journal_vol39no1/index.php#/34 Henry, K. B., & Schein, H. K. (1998). Academic community in residence halls: What differentiates a hall with a living/learning program? Journal of College and University Student Housing, 27(2) , 9 14. Heyman, G. D., Martyna, B., & Bhatia, S. (2002). Gender and achievement related beliefs among engineering students. Journal o f Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 8 (1), 41 52. Hyde, M. S., & Gess Newsome, J. (1999/2000). Adjusting educational practice to increase female persistence in the sciences. Journal of College Student Retention, 1 (4), 335 355.

PAGE 172

172 Inkelas, K. K. (2008). Innovative directions for living learning program research and practice. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 35 (1) , 8 13. Inkelas, K. K. (2011). Living learning programs for women in STEM. New Directions for Institutio nal Research, (152) , 27 37. doi: 10.1002/ir.406 Inkelas, K. K., Vogt, K. E., Longerbeam, S. D., & Owen, J. E. (2006). Measuring outcomes of living learning programs: Examining college environments and student learning and development. The Journal of Genera l Education, 55 (1), 40 76. doi: 10.1353/jge.2006.0017 Inkelas, K. K., & Weisman, J. L. (2003). Different by design: An examination of student outcomes among participants in three types of living learning programs. Journal of College Student Development, 44 (3), 335 365. doi: 10.1353/csd/2003.0027 Jessup Anger, J., Wawrzynski, M. R., & Yao, C. W . (2011). Enhancing undergraduate education: Examining faculty experiences during their first year in a residential college and exploring the implications for studen t affairs professionals. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 38 (1) , 56 69. Johnson, A. C. (2011). Accomplishments and challenges for women in STEM: Implications for future research and programs. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 17 (1), 5 10. Johnson, J. L. (2000 2001). Learning communities and special efforts in the retention of Journal of College Student Retention, 2 (3), 219 238. doi: 10.2190/V0PA BL4B 1X2L W5VT Johnson, W. G. (1996). Strategies for enhancing student learning in residence halls. New Directions for Student Services, (75) , 69 82. doi: 10.1002/ss.37119967508 Jones, J. B. (2003). Effects of living learning programs, on campus housing, and gender on . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA. Jones, S. R, Torres, V. &, Arminio, J. (2006). Negotiating the complexities of qualitati v e research in higher education: Fundamental elements and issues . New York: Routledge. research in ambiguous, conflictual, and changing contexts. The Qualitative Report, 11 (2), 208 228. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR11 2/kacen.pdf class. Journal o f College and University Student Housing, 38 (1) , 10 25. Kleinman, S. S. (2003). Women in science and engineering building community online. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 9 (1), 73 83.

PAGE 173

173 Knight, M. T., & Cunningham, C. M. (2004). Building a structure of support: An inside look at the structure of women in engineering programs. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 10 (1), 1 20. Kochis, B., & Gillespie, D. (2006). Conceptual metaphors as interpretive tools in qu alitative research: A re The Qualitative Report, 11 (3), 566 585. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR11 3/kochis.pdf Komarraju, M ., Musulkin, S., & Bhattacharya, G. (2010). Role of student faculty interactions in concept, motivation, and achievement. J ournal of College Student Development, 51 (3), 332 342. doi: 10.1353/csd.0.0137 Koro Ljungb erg, M. (2001). Metaphors as a way to explore qualitative data. Qualitative Studies in Education 14 (3), 367 379. Koro Ljungberg, M. (2008). Validity and validation in the making in the context of qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 18 (7), 98 3 989 . doi: 10.1177/1049732308318039 Koro Ljungberg, M., Yendol Hoppey, D. Smith, J. J., & Hayes, S. B. (2009). (E)pistemological awareness, instantiation of methods, and uniformed methodological ambiguity in qualitative research projects. Educational Rese archer, 38 (9), 687 699. doi: 10.3102/0013189X09351980 Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors we live by (2nd ed.) . Chicago: The University of Chicago Pr ess. Landry, C. C. (2002 2003). Retention of women and people of color: Unique challenges and institutional responses. Journal of College Student Retention, 4 (1), 1 13. Lenning, O. T., & Ebbers, L.H. (1999). The powerful potential of learning communities: Improving education for the future . ASHE ERIC Higher Education Report Volume 16, No. 6. Washington, D.C.: The George Washington University, Graduate School of Education and Human Development. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1999). Establishing trustworthiness. In A. Bryman & R. G. Burgess (Eds.), Qualitative Research (Vol. 3, pp. 397 444). London: Sage. (Reprinted from Naturalistic inquiry , by Y. Lincoln & E. Guba, 1985, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage) Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contra dictions, and emerging confluences. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2 nd ed., pp. 163 188). London: Sage. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (20 13 ). The constructivist credo . Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.

PAGE 174

174 Linley, J. L., & George Jackson, C. E. (2013). Addressing underrepresentation in STEM fields through undergraduate interventions. New Directions for Student Services, 144 , 97 102. doi: 10.1002/ss.20073 Longerbeam, S. D., Inkelas, K. K., & Brower, A. M. (2007). Secondhand benefits: Student outcomes in residence halls with living learning programs. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 34 (2), 10 13. Longerbeam, S. D., & Sedlacek, W. E. (2006). Attitudes toward diversity and living learning outcomes among first and second year college students. NASPA Journal, 43 (1), 40 55. Longwell Grice, R., & Keer, K. (20 13 ). Counselor, teacher, role model, cop: Understanding RA satisfaction through the use of metaphor. Jo urnal of College and University Student Housing, 3 9 ( 2 ) , 90 103 . Lord, S. M., Camacho, M. M., Layton, R. A., Long, R. A., Ohland, M. W., & Wasburn, M. H. Asian, black, Hispanic, Native American, and white students. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 15 (2), 167 190. Lucena, J. C. (200 0 ). Making women and minorities in science and engineering for national purposes in the United States . Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 6 ( 1 ), 1 31 . Micari, M., Gould, A. K., & Lainez, L. (2010). Becoming a leader along the way: Embedding leadership training into a large scale peer learning program in the STEM disciplines. J ournal of College Student Development, 51 (2), 218 230. Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/csd/summary/v051/51.2.micari.html Marra, R. M., & Bogue, B. (2004). The assessing women in engineering project: A model for sustainable and profitable coll aboration. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 10 (3), 283 295. McCluskey meaningfully in our residence hall programs [Point of view]. Journal of Coll ege and University Student Housing, 33 (2), 10 13. McCluskey Titus, P., & Oliver, R. (2001). The relationship between community development and academic achievement of undergraduate students in residence halls. College Student Affairs Journal, 20 (2), 12 21. McCluskey Titus, P., Oliver, R. S., Wilson, M. E., Hall, L. M., Cawthon, T. W., & Crandall, P. D. (2002). The relationship between community and academic achievement in residence halls. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 30 (2), 11 16. McKe lfresh, D. A. (1980). The effect of living environments on engineering students. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 10(2) , 16 18.

PAGE 175

175 Journal of Women and Minorities i n Science and Engineering, 5 , 239 263. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (Rev. ed.). San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Meyers, K. L., Silliman, S.E., Gedde, N.L., & Ohland, M. W. (2010). A comparison of engineering year experiences. Journal of Engineering Education, 99 (2), 169 178. Moring, I. (2001). Detecting the fictional problem solvers in time and space: Metaphors guiding qualitative analysis and interpretation. Qualitative I nquiry 7 (3), 346 369. Morse, J. M. (1995). The significance of saturation. Qualitative Health Research, 5 (2), 147 149. doi: 10.1177/104973239500500201 National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics. (2011). Women, minorities, and per sons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2011 . Special Report NSF 11 309. Arlington, VA. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/ . Nesheim, B. E., Guentzel, M. J., Kellogg, A. H., McDonald , W. M., Wells, C. A., & Whitt, E. J. (2007). Outcomes for students of student affairs academic affairs partnership programs. J ournal of College Student Development, 48 (4), 435 545. doi: 10.1353/csd.2007.0041 Women and girls in science and engineering: Understanding the barriers to recruitment, retention and persistence across the educational trajectory. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 12 (2 3), 209 232. abilities, values, and goals with science and humanities majors. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 2 (1), 33 47 Pace, D. G., Witucki, L. A., & Bl umreich, K. M. (2008). Benefiting female students in science, math, and engineering: The nuts and bolts of establishing a WISE (Women in Science and Engineering) learning community. NASPA Journal, 45 (3), 373 383. Padilla International Review of Qualitative Research, 3 (3), 315 330. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 35 (2) , 86 99. Pascarella, E. T. (2006). How college affects students: Ten directions for future research. J ournal of College Student Development, 47 (5), 508520. doi: 10.1353/csd.2006.0060

PAGE 176

176 Pascarella, E. T., Teren zini, P. T., & Blimling, G. S. (1994). The impact of residential life on students. Realizing the educational potential of residence halls , 22 52. Pasque, P. A., & Murphy, R. (2005). The intersections of living learning programs and social identity as facto rs of academic achievement and intellectual engagement. Journal of College Student Development, 46 (4), 429 441. doi: 10.1353/csd.2005.0041 Penven, J., Stephens, R., Shushok, Jr, F., & Keith, C. (2013). The past, present, and future of residential colleges: Journal of College and University Student Housing, 39 (2), 114 126. Peterfreund, A. R., Rath, K. A., Xenos, S. P., & Bayliss, F. (2007 2008). The impact of supplemental instruction on st udents in STEM courses: Results from San Francisco State University. Journal of College Student Retention, 9 (4), 487 503. Pitcher, R. (2013). Using metaphor analysis: MIP and beyond. The Qualitative Report, 18 , Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR18/pitcher68.pdf Ramaley, J. A. (2002). New truths and old verities. New Directions for Higher Education, 119 , 15 19. Ramsey, L. R., Betz, D. E., & Sekaquaptewa, D. (2013). The effects of an academic environment intervention on science identification among women in STEM. Social Psychology of Education, 16 (3), 377 397. doi: 10.1007/s11218 013 9218 6 Reinharz, S, & Chase, S. E. (20 0 3). Interviewing women . In J. A. Holstein, & J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Inside interviewing : New lenses, new concern. (pp. 73 91 ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Reissman, C. K. (20 0 3). Analysis of personal narratives. In J. A. Holstein, & J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Ins ide interviewing : New lenses, new concern. (pp. 331 347 ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Riker, H. C., & Decoster, D. A. (2008). The educational role in college student housing. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 35 (2) , 80 85. Reprint: 1971, 1(1), 3 7. Rowan Kenyon, H., Soldner, M., & Inkelas, K. K. (2007). The contributions of living learning programs on developing sense of civic engagement in undergraduate students. NASPA Journal, 44 (4), 750 776. Rutar, T. & Mason, G. (2005). A learning community of university freshman design, freshman graphics, and high school technology students: Description, projects, and assessment. Journal of Engineering Education, 95 (2), 245 254. actors that encourage and discourage classroom participation. Journal of College Student Development, 44 (6), 831 844. Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/csd/summary/v044/44.6.salter.html

PAGE 177

177 Sax, L. J., Bryant, A. N., & Harper, C. E. (2005). The differential effects of student faculty interaction on college outcomes for women and men. J ournal of College Student Development, 46 (6), 642 659. Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/csd/summary/v046/46.6.sax.html Schmitt, R. (2005). Systematic metaphor analysis as a method of qualitative research. The Qualit ative Report 10 (2), 358 394. Schoem, D. (2004). Sustaining living learning programs. In J. L. Laufgraben, N. S. Shapiro, & Associates (Eds.), Sustaining and improving learning communities (pp. 130 156). San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Schudde, L. T. (2011). The casual effect of campus residency on college student engagement. The Review of Higher Education, 34 (4), 581 610. doi: 10.1353/rhe.2011.0023 Schuh, J. H. (1988). Residence halls. In A. L. Rentz & G. L. Saddlemire (Eds.), Student affairs functio ns in higher education (p. 227 260). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Schulze, E., & Tomal, A. (2006). The chilly classroom: Beyond gender. College Teaching, 54 (3), 263 269. doi: 10.3200/CTCH.54.3.263 270 Schussler, D. L., & Fierros, E. G. (2008). Stude and sense of belonging: Comparisons across residential learning communities. Journal of the First Year Experience & Students in Transition, 20 (1), 71 96. Schwandt, T. A. (1994). Constructivist, interpreti vist approaches to human inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 118 137). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Shushok, Jr, F., Arcelus, V. J., Finger, E. F., & Kidd, V. (2013). Academic initiatives. In N. W. Dunkel, & J . A. Baumann (Eds.), Campus housing management: Vol. 2. Residence life & Education. (pp. 24 59). Columbus, OH: Association of College & University Housing Officers International. Shushok, Jr, F., & Sriram, R. (2010). Exploring the effect of a residential a cademic affairs student affairs partnership: The first year of an engineering and computer science living learning center. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 36 (2), 68 81. Single, P. B., Muller, C. B., Cunningham, C. M., Single, R. M., & Ca rlsen, W. S. (2005). Mentornet: E mentoring for women students in engineering and science. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 11 (3), 295 309. Soldner, M., Rowan Kenyon, H., Inkelas, K. K., Garvey, J., & Robbins, C. (2012). Supporti ng learning programs among other social cognitive factors. The Journal of Higher Education, 83 (3) , 311 336. doi: 10.1353.jhe.2012.0017

PAGE 178

178 Soldner, M., & Szelenyi, K. (2008). A national po learning programs. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 35 (1) , 14 31. Spanierman, L. B., Soble, J. R., Mayfield, J. B., Neville, H. A., Aber, M., Khuri, L., & De La Rosa, B. (2013). Living learning communities and stu belonging. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice,50 (3), 308 325. doi: 10.1515/jsarp 2013 0022 Spears, J. D., Dyer, R. A., Franks, S. E., & Montelone, B. A. (2004). Building a network to support girls and women in sc ience, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 10 (2), 161 177. Sriram, R., Shushok, Jr., F., Perkins, J., & Scales, T. L. (2011). Students as teachers: What faculty learn by living on campus. Jo urnal of College and University Student Housing, 38 (1) , 40 55. Stage, F. K., & Kinzie, J. (2009). Reform in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: The classroom context. The Journal of General Education, 58 (2), 85 105. doi: 10.135 3/jge.0.038 Stassen, M. L. A. (2003). Student outcomes: The impact of varying living learning community models. Research in Higher Education, 44 (5), 581 613. doi: 10.1023/A:1025495309569 Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52 (6), 613 629. doi: 10.1037/0003 066X.52.6.613 s in constructivist research. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice,47 (3), 291 306. doi: 10.2202/1949 6605 6130 Stewart, G. M. (2008). Assessing learning outcomes in living learning programs: One journey. Journal of College and University Studen t Housing, 35 (1) , 50 65. Stiltz, L. Buettner, H., Kennedy, E, Zundl, E., & White, C. (2013). A unique co curricular partnership: The Douglass engineering living learning community inspires women to succeed. Paper presented at the 5 th First Year Engineering Experience (FYEE) Conference, Pittsburgh, PA. Suresh, R. (2006 2007). The relationship between barrier courses and persistence in engineering. Journal of College Student Retention, 8 (2), 215 239. Szelenyi, K., Denson, N., & Inkelas, K. K. (2013). Women in STEM majors and professional outcome expectations: The role of living learning programs and other college environments. Research in Higher Education, 54 (8), 851 873. doi: 10.1007/s11162 013 9299 2

PAGE 179

179 Szelenyi, K., & Inkelas, K . K. (2011). The role of living attend graduate school in STEM fields. Research in Higher Education, 52 (4), 349 369. doi: 10.1007/s11162 010 9197 9 Thompson, M., Oakes, W., & Bodner, G. (2005). A qualitative investigat ion of students in a first year engineering learning community. Paper presented at the 35 th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Indianapolis, IN. Torres, V., & Baxter Magolda, M. B. (2002). The evolving role of the researcher in constructivist lon gitudinal studies. Journal of College Student Development, 43 (4), 474 489. Tsui, L. (2010). Overcoming barriers: Engineering programs environments that support women. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 16 (2), 137 160. Veenstra, C. P., Dey, E. L., & Herrin, G. D. (2009). A model for freshman engineering retention. Advances in Engineering Education, 1 (3), 1 33. Retrieved from http://advances.asee.org/vol01/issue03/07.cfm Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 9 (3&4), 217 238. Vogt, C. M., Hocevar, D., & Hagedorn, L. S. (2007). A social cognitive construct va lidation: The Journal of Higher Education, 78 (3), 337 364. doi: 10.1353/jhe.2007.0019 advancement in the STEM d isciplines. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 13 (1), 77 94. Wadia Fascetti, S. & Leventman, P. G. (2000). E mentoring: A longitudinal approach to mentoring relationships for women pursuing technical careers. Journal of Engineering Education, 89 (3), 295 300. Wallace, J. E., & Haines. V. A. (2004). The benefits of mentoring for engineering students. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 10 (4), 377 391. Wang, Y., Arboleda, A., Shelley, II, M. C., & Whalen, D. F. (2003). The influence of residence hall community on academic success of male and female undergraduate students. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 32 (2), 16 22. Wao, H. O, Lee, R. S., & Borman, K. (2010). Climate for retention to graduatio n: A mixed methods investigation of student perceptions of engineering departments and programs. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 16 (4), 293 317. Wasburn, M. H., & Miller, S. G. (2004 2005). Retaining undergraduate women in scien ce, engineering, and technology: A survey of a student organization. Journal of College Student Retention, 6 (2), 155 168.

PAGE 180

180 Wawrzynski, M. R., & Jessup Anger, J. E. (2010). From expectations to experiences: Using a structural typology to understand first yea r student outcomes in academically based living learning communities. Journal of College Student Development, 51 (2), 201 217. doi: 10.1353/csd.0.0119 Wawrzynski, M. R., Jessup Anger, J. E., Stolz, K., Helman, C. & Beaulieu, J. (2009). Exploring erceptions of academically based living learning communities. College Student Affairs Journal, 28 (1), 138 158. Weidman, J. C. (1989). Undergraduate socialization: A conceptual approach. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and researc h, (Vol. 5, pp. 289 322). New York: Agathon Press. Wentling, R. M. & Camacho, C. (2008). Women engineers: Factors and obstacles related to the pursuit of a degree in engineering. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 14 (1), 83 118. Wh living learning community. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 36 (1) , 38 47. Whitt, E. J., Nesheim, B. E., Guentzel, M. J., Kellogg, A. H., McDonald, W. M ., & Wells, C. A. programs. J ournal of College Student Development, 49 (3), 235 249. doi: 10.1353/csd.2008.0007 Winston, R. B., Jr., & Anchors, S. (1993). Student development in the residential environment. In R. B. Winston, Jr., S. Anchors, & Associates (Eds.), Student housing and residential life (pp. 25 64). San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Witucki, L. A., Pace, D. G., & Blumreich, K. M. (2008). Benefiting female students in sci ence, math, and engineering: Establishing a WISE (Women in Science and Engineering) learning community. The Journal About Women in Higher Education, 1 (1), 227 229. Yauch, C. A. (1999). Majoring in engineering: A study of gender differences. Journal of Wome n and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 5 , 183 205. Yaun, J. F. (2010). Into the FYRE: The first year residential experience at the University of Miami A housing strategy for student learning and success. Journal of College & Character, 11 (1), 1 7. do i: 10.2202/1940 1639.1020 Zhang, L. (2011). Does merit based aid affect degree production in STEM fields? Evidence from Georgia and Florida. The Journal of Higher Education, 82 (4), 389 415. Zhao, C., Carini, R. M., & Kuh, G. D. (2005). Searching for the Pe ach Blossom Shangri La: Student engagement of men and women SMET majors. The Review of Higher Education, 28 (4), 503 525. doi: 10.1353/rhe.2005.0054

PAGE 181

181 Zheng, J. L., Saunders, K. P., Shelley, II, M. C., & Whalen, D. F. (2002). Predictors of academic success fo r freshman residence hall students. Journal of College Student Development 43 (2), 267 283.

PAGE 182

182 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Dr. Cliff Haynes was born and raised in the small farming community of Gillett, Arkansas . He attended the Gillett Public School System and graduated as valedictorian from Gillett High School . Upon receiving a full ride academic scholarship, he attended the University of Arkansas and graduated with a Bachelor of Arts in communication with a minor in political science. Having been highly invo lved in multiple student organization during college, Cliff was encouraged to pursue student affairs as a career by mentors and his student organization advisors . He then attended Virginia Tech where he earned his Master of Arts in Education degree in hig her education and student affairs . While there, he served as the Residence Hall Federation graduate adviser and the graduate hall director of the all male Pritchard Hall . It was learning programs bega n, culminating in his After graduation, Cliff began working at Texas State University San Marcos as a residence director for Tower Hall . He served as the Residence Hall Associatio n advisor , and this is where he first began to work with LLPs in the form of freshman interest groups . After three years, he accepted a job at the University of Florida in the Department of Housing and Residence Education . While at UF, Cliff served as th e first ever coordinator of academic residential programs and was promoted to academic initiatives specialist . He served as the adviser to the regional advisor. Af ter his first year working at the University of Florida, Cliff applied to and was admitted into the Higher Education Administration program . During the course of his studies, he also declared a minor in Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methodology unde r the guidance of Dr.

PAGE 183

183 Mirka Koro Ljungberg . Attending part time, Cliff used the course papers and projects as the basis of professional association conference presentations or publications. s include living learning programs, fac ulty engagement outside of the classroom, student organization advising, the use of technology in student affairs practice, and the use of qualitative research in student learning assessment . He has presented multiple presentations at various internationa l, national, and regional conferences including the Association of College and University Housing International (ACUHO I) annual c onference and e xposition , the ACUHO I Living Learning Programs Conference, the NASPA Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education a nnual c onference , the Southeastern Association of Housing Officers a nnual conference, the Southwest Association of Housing Officers annual conference, and the Southeast Philosophy of Education Society annual meeting. Cliff has also published h i s research in the International Journal of Doctoral Studies, the Journal of College and University Student Housing, and the Journal of Learning Spaces. In his free time, Cliff is an entertainment and performing arts enthusiast and can often be seen at the movies and the theater . While living in Florida, he has also taken advantage of his proximity to the various theme parks within the state and has been a season pass holder for many of them.