Build a Better Book (BBB) is a novel STEM education initiative that engages youth in an authentic, empathy-driven engineering design experience in which they create inclusive books, games, and toys for children who are blind or have low-vision. BBB designers learn about users' needs through empathy-building and tactile activities, and iteratively test and improve designs using feedback from others, including users with visual impairments. Programs take place in formal and informal learning environments and benefit from community partnerships. This chapter shares the BBB network's trajectory from a few sites in Colorado to a national network of informal and formal education partners adapting and implementing BBB programming. Research findings offer insights about the strengths of the BBB model and how it has been able to effectively scale and be sustained across diverse settings, audiences, and program formats. The chapter also shares how the initial successes of short-term programs led to the current exploration of more intensive and career-oriented opportunities for youth.
TopIntroduction
Broadening participation in engineering and other STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) fields is a national priority and yet many groups – including women, students of color and those with disabilities – continue to be significantly underrepresented in STEM professions (Hynes et al., 2016; National Science Board, 2022; Wilkins-Yel et al., 2019). Many youths continue to have a limited, stereotypical perception of what engineering is, and often this fails to align with how they view their own interests and strengths (Hynes et al., 2016; Hynes & Maxey, 2018; National Academy of Engineering [NAE], 2008). Among girls, for example, some research suggests a disconnect between career motivators (e.g., making a difference, good work environment) and their perceptions of engineering, which they do not think is ‘for them’ (Hynes et al., 2016; NAE, 2008). Several studies have documented how gendered self-conceptions, professional identities, and the expertise areas that are valued in engineering (technical, rather than social consciousness) likely contribute to fewer women persisting in engineering and a significant wage gap in engineering careers (Cech, 2013, 2015; Wilkins-Yel et al., 2019). The lack of diversity in engineering has negative implications for the field, as greater diversity can lead to improved creativity, innovation and productivity (Smith-Doerr et al., 2017).
To address this disparity, some groups have called for a reframing of engineering to shift away from a focus on technology and toward a focus on the important work that engineers do. In 2008, for example, the NAE released Changing the Conversation, an effort to shift messaging from engineering as a profession that requires certain skills and yields personal benefits to one that uses creative ideas to have beneficial, societal impact. This aligns with research suggesting that focusing on engineering as a ‘helping’ profession may help to diversify the field by making it more attractive to young people, particularly women (Bielefeldt, 2017). In a similar vein, the People Part of Engineering (PPE) framework (Fila et al., 2014) emerged to emphasize the central importance of people in engineering: that engineering includes engineering for people, with people and as people. This framework shifts from an emphasis on technical and analytical training to a more holistic approach that emphasizes the “people” aspect of engineering. Engineering can be viewed as a process of creating products for people; engineers work with others, including team members and various stakeholders; and engineers bring their own experiences and perspectives as people to their education and their work. This humanistic framework calls for holistic engineering education experiences that enable students to work collaboratively to engineer for real clients with real needs, engaging in authentic communication, iterative design and feedback (Fila et al., 2014).