1. CRA-W Mentoring Programs Successes and Future Plans Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing September 2000

2. Overview DMP & CREW successes & future plans (Mary Jean Harrold, Sheila Castañeda) Breakout sessions –Sharing Experiences / Mentor Advice (Mary Jean Harrold, Sheila Castañeda) –Scaling the Programs (Anne Condon) –Diversifying the Mentor Pool (Mary Lou Soffa) –Increasing the Applicant Pool (Ann Redelfs, Sally McKee) Summary and questions

3. DMP: Distributed Mentor Project Goal: Improve representation of women holding high-level positions in industry and academia Method: Provide research experience for undergraduates with female faculty members at research university Implementation: Pair undergraduates (potential for graduate-school success) with female faculty members (active research programs) for summer of research

4. DMP Funding National Science Foundation under the Experimental and Integrated Activities program (1994-95, O’Rourke, 1996-1998, Condon, 1999- 2001, Harrold, 2002-2004, Amato will submit) Computing Research Association Committee on the Status of Women in Computing (CRA-W) National Science Foundation’s Partnership for Advanced Computational Infrastructure (NPACI)

5. DMP 1999 – 2000 Funded 18, 19 students respectively from a variety of colleges and universities Matched two students per mentor where possible (matches made by Selection Committee) Record of 2000 projects maintained by students (inspired by Sara Smolensky, 1999 participant) Described in Computing Research News, September 2000

6. Students Supported 1999 (18 students) Bucknell University, Northwestern University, University of Oregon, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, Dartmouth College, Brown University, University of Southern California, University of Minnesota, Morris, Harvey Mudd College, Purdue University, University of Tulsa, Mississippi State University, Williams College, Duke University, Rice University, Trinity College, Uniersity of Missouri, Brooklyn College

7. Mentors’ Affiliations 1999 (14 mentors) University of Utah, University of California San Diego, Brown University, Duke University, Worchester Polytechnic Institute, Rice University, Georgia Institute of Technology, University of Tulsa, University of Massachusetts, Brooklyn College, University of Central Florida

8. Students Supported 2000 (20 students) Columbia University, Marymount College, University of Oregon, University of California, Polytechnic University, Rutgers University, University of Southern California, Mills College, Ashland University, Hope College, University of Oregon, Transylvania University, Bucknell University, Franciscan University, University of Pittsburgh, University of Delaware, Santa Clara University, Dartmouth University, Purdue University

9. Mentors’ Affiliations 2000 (15 mentors) Polytechnic University, George Mason University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, Brown University, University of Georgia, University of Utah, University of Wisconsin, Duke University, University of Pittsburgh, University of Delaware, North Carolina State University, University of Washington

10. Students / Mentors

11. DMP Successes Summer 1999 participants (LEAD Center) CRN article, CRA-W web site –100% learned/gained more than they had expected –100% reported change in attitude about graduate school after experience –72% were committed to graduate school after experience Participants with graduate degrees?

12. DMP Future Plans LEAD Center evaluation –Summer 2000 evaluation –Longitudinal evaluation Scaling –Diversification of mentors, institutions –Broader funding base

13. CREW: Collaborative Research Experience for Women in Undergraduate Science and Engineering Goals –Increase the opportunity to do research –Decrease the isolation that may be experienced in doing independent research –Encourage women scientists and engineers to pursue similar work in graduate school

14. CREW Funding Computing Research Association Committee on the Status of Women in Computing (CRA-W) National Science Foundation’s Partnership for Advanced Computational Infrastructure’s Education, Outreach and Training program (NPACI) $25,000 per year budget

15. Projects Supported 1998-1999 (20 students, 9 advisors) –Brooklyn College, CUNY –Bryn Mar College –Case Western Reserve University –Grinnell College –North Carolina A&T State University –Texas Christian University –University of Wisconsin, La Crosse

16. Projects Supported (cont’d) 1999-2000 (10/27 funded, 22 students, 13 advisors) –Columbia University –Lawrence University –Marymount University –Middlebury College –Northwest Missouri State University –Rutgers University –Texas Wesleyan University –University of the South –Western Washington University

17. Projects Supported (cont’d) 2000-2001 (11/14 funded, 27 students, 14 advisors) –Brooklyn College –College of New Jersey –James Madison University –North Carolina A&T University –Northwest Missouri State University –San Diego State University –Sonoma State University –University of Alabama, Huntsville –University of Alaska, Fairbanks –University of Montana, Missoula

18. Students

19. CREW Future Plans Expand the program Secure additional funding Provide additional evaluation of results (pre- and post-surveys)

20. Sharing Experiences / Mentor Advice Goals of Session –Share experiences and advice about being a good mentor –Develop concrete list of useful information for mentors and students –Publish the information for future participants in the program (after conference)

21. Areas for Discussion What works well and what doesn’t? What kinds of preparations are needed (e.g., research plans, travel, housing) ? How can the research project be structured, stay on track, and meet the timeline? What can be done if the research isn’t progressing as you had expected?

22. Areas for Discussion How can interaction with research group/community be fostered? What kind of interaction should you expect from the supervisor or mentor? What can be done if your mentor is not as supportive as you expect? How can students participate in social activities during mentor experience? How can we stay in touch with students after they participate in a project?

23. Scaling the Programs Motivation: –Reach more students, including Canadians –Enhance the DMP experience for students Proposed Approach: –Industrial sponsors –Mentors from industry/national research labs which pay for students –Institutions help pay student stipends (provides edge on recruiting students to grad school)

24. Diversifying the Mentor Pool Develop a group mentoring model with both men and women faculty as mentors Benefits: – Broader pool of mentors for program –Opportunity for men to work towards expanding the pipeline –New mentoring structures for students Retain current single-mentor format

25. Increasing the Applicant Pool Through Connections/Activities Partnerships: MentorNet, Institute for Women in Technology, GirlGeeks, National Institute for Women in Trades, Technology & Science Funding sources: NSF, DARPA, NIH Professional associations and their student groups Minority serving institutions, women’s colleges, junior colleges Conferences Articles / press releases / reports