Engineering's Systemic Marginalization and Devaluation of Students and Professionals With Disabilities

Abstract

Compared to other axes of difference, the experiences of persons with disabilities is often excluded from dialog about diversity and inclusion in engineering education and engineering employment. Recent scholars have suggested that engineering fields may be particularly marginalizing for persons with disabilities. Disability status is often culturally associated with negative stereotypes about intellectual ability, where persons with disabilities are often perceived as less professionally competent than their peers. This association is further compounded by the fact that engineering culture often silences discussions of bodily ability when evaluating performance. However, systematic accounts of the challenges faced by persons with disabilities in school and the workforce are often missing. Using two large survey datasets, I examine the experiences of engineering students and engineering professionals with physical and/or mental disabilities, compared to the experiences of their peers who do not report disabilities. The first data source, the ASEE Diversity and Inclusion Survey, includes data from over 1700 students enrolled in eight engineering programs in the US. The second data source, the STEM Inclusion Study survey, includes data from over 8,000 professional engineers employed in the US. Consistent with national-level estimates in STEM, 13% of engineering students report a physical disability, 3% report a chronic illness, and 9% report mental health issues. Among engineering professionals, 7% report a physical disability, 7% report a chronic illness, and 4% report mental health difficulties. Consistent with hypotheses, I find that both engineering students and engineering professionals with physical and mental disabilities are more likely than their peers to report social marginalization from their classmates and colleagues and devaluation of their professional capabilities at school and work. Engineering students with disabilities are more likely to intend to leave their engineering programs, and engineering professionals with disabilities are more likely to have thought about leaving their job in the last year compared to their peers. These findings suggest systemic biases faced by persons with disabilities in engineering. I join the call for greater attention to the cultural and structural barriers to full participation evidenced by this and other research.