Diversity and Inclusion in Civil and Environmental Engineering

The Special Collection on Diversity and Inclusion in Civil Engineering Education and Practice can be accessed online at https://ascelibrary.org/page/jpepe3/diversity_inclusion_civil_engineering.

Engineers are problem solvers. Civil engineers, in particular, are challenged with solving problems that impact many facets of societal well-being: clean air and water, waste management, transportation, drainage/flood mitigation, land development, safe structures, and so forth. Communities are not one size fits all, and neither are the solutions to the challenges they face. In fact, while the underlying challenge (e.g., clean water) might be the same for different populations, the approach to solving the challenges that arise from it are usually very different depending on the societal context. Engineering solutions are optimal when they include perspectives from the populations they serve. This concept of inclusion is often overlooked in conversations and policies regarding diversity in both academic and practical settings.

In July 2017, the ASCE Board of Direction approved and adopted Canon 8 of the Society’s Code of Ethics. The first canon to be added to an existing code in nearly 70 years, it was proposed by ASCE’s Committee on Diversity and Inclusion (CDI) in collaboration with the Committee on Ethical Practice (CEP) to address concerns about, and the realities of, inequities and inequalities in the civil engineering profession. Similar to those of other professional engineering societies, the Guidelines to Practice for Canon 8 require civil engineers to treat all persons fairly and to avoid discriminatory and harassing behaviors. Unique to Canon 8 is the practice of inclusion. Guideline 8 (c) requires civil engineers to “consider the diversity of the community, and … endeavor in good faith to include diverse perspectives, in the planning and performance of … professional services” (ASCE 2017). This guideline necessitates the inclusion not only of engineers with diverse perspectives and from diverse backgrounds in design and decision making but also of people from the communities they serve.

Engineers are problem solvers, yet one problem that has been persistent through the years is diversity and inclusion in civil engineering education and practice. According to data published by the American Society for Engineering Education, bachelor’s degree recipients in the United States from 2007 through 2015 were overwhelmingly male ($\sim 81\%$) and largely White ($\sim 67\%$). These numbers are consistent with 2015–2016 data for civil engineering showing that $\sim 76\%$ of bachelor’s degree recipients were men and 60.1% were White (Yoder 2017; ASEE 2018). There is no equivalent data for people with disabilities or other demographic groups; however, the National Science Foundation, in Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering (NSF 2017), reports that scientists and engineers with disabilities are more likely to be unemployed than their counterparts without disabilities. A barrier to increasing the diversity of engineering students and practitioners has been organizational climate and culture.

One way to address the issue of diversity is through undergraduate curricula. Recently published changes in criteria for the Engineering Accreditation Commission (EAC) of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) presents several opportunities for diversity and inclusion to be incorporated into engineering curricula. For example, the new criteria define a team as being “… more than one person working toward a common goal and should include individuals of diverse backgrounds, skills, or perspectives” (ABET 2017). If these criteria are well implemented, students will learn to value and respect difference and to create and maintain inclusive work environments when they become practitioners and/or educators. Further, in defining engineering design, the EAC (ABET 2017) has expanded the illustrative constraints to include accessibility, ergonomics, functionality, interoperability, legal considerations, and usability, all of which are related in some way to diverse end-users’ needs. This can be addressed by infusing curricula with principles of universal design in much the same way that educators have done with sustainability over the past couple of decades.

In anticipation of the changes that Canon 8 will bring and the revised ABET EAC criteria, the guest editors undertook an effort to identify research and practices that are evolving in civil engineering and related disciplines. The result is the ASCE Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice (JPI) Special Collection on Diversity and Inclusion in Civil Engineering Education and Practice. The collection contains 11 papers—six new and five recently published—about studies conducted in Australia, Spain, and the United States on faculty, students, and practitioners.

Of the six new papers, five explore gender and race separately or intersectionally in academia; the remaining paper, a demographic and motivating factors study for women practicing in the architecture, engineering, construction and operations industry, is an intersectional examination of practice.

Three papers focus on civil engineering students and examine how and to what extent ethics is taught through curricular and cocurricular experiences differently by men and women; students’ degree choice and learning experience and strategies for attracting female students; and how underrepresented engineering persisters use different forms of cultural wealth to achieve their goal to obtain an engineering degree.

Two papers provide implications for civil engineering education and practice from other disciplines. The relationship between student support staff who regularly work with students from underrepresented groups and the retention of civil engineering students is examined in one. The other proposes how critically relevant pedagogy may be an important approach for civil engineering educators to foster equity in the profession.

The five recently published papers add diversity and inclusion research related to intercultural competencies, ethnicity, and professional considerations for students and faculty. They demographically examine graduation rates, career expectations, and intercultural competencies of civil engineering undergraduate students. One paper examines the perceived career barriers for Spanish female and male building engineering students. Another examines the job satisfaction of women faculty in civil engineering.

Collectively, the papers in this special collection offer educators and practitioners important insights supporting recruitment and retention of civil engineering students, faculty, and professionals.

Historically, researchers and practitioners have focused their diversity efforts on gender, race, and ethnicity, which is evident in the collection. Absent from the collection are papers that investigate other dimensions of diversity—disability, socioeconomic status, veterans, and the like—in civil engineering education and practice. Although the editors have assembled a high-quality collection that is both insightful and thought provoking, more research and practical applications are needed to address diversity and inclusion more broadly.