Vanessa Svihla

Background: Commitment to degree and career are commonly connected to developing identity in the discipline and feelings of confidence (self‐efficacy) about disciplinary practices. While these psychosocial factors are well studied in engineering, they are less often linked to specific learning experiences. In design education, such experiences include framing agency —the ability to use one's agency to frame design problems. Purpose: We extend typical models of persistence intentions to examine the effects of engaging in design problem framing. We conjectured that framing agency relates to engineering identity and engineering design self‐efficacy. We sought to answer the following research questions: To what extent do framing agency constructs predict first‐year and senior students' design self‐efficacy, engineering identity, and persistence intentions? Does this vary for students from privileged and minoritized genders or from privileged and minoritized racial/ethnic groups? Methods: We used a previously tested survey to measure framing agency, engineering identity, engineering design self‐efficacy, persistence intentions, and demographics. We employed structural equation modeling on a national sample ( n = 636 first‐year students; n = 355 seniors). Results: Overall, engineering identity predicted persistence intentions for all students, but design self‐efficacy did not. Specific framing agency constructs, especially individual consequentiality, explained variance in self‐efficacy and identity across models. For women/non‐binary students, shared consequentiality predicted engineering identity and design self‐efficacy. For students from minoritized racial/ethnic groups, learning as consequentiality and individual consequentiality predicted career persistence intentions. Conclusions: Providing students with multiple opportunities to develop design problem framing skills may play a role in broadening participation.

The persistent exclusion of historically marginalized groups in STEM remains one of higher education’s most pressing grand challenges aligned with UNESCO’s Sustainable Development Goals—Quality Education (Goal 4) and Reduced Inequalities (Goal 10). In a time when diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice work is increasingly restricted politically, institutionally, and culturally, faculty and educational developers are seeking ways to sustain meaningful, human-centered change. This paper describes arts-based practices—embedded in a Community of Transformation (CoT)—that cultivate radical hope and support members to envision liberatory futures. We detail how these arts-based practices—speculative design, remixing, and futurity—foster radical hope and support faculty to reflect critically. Activities such as protest art, narrative remixing with AI, quilt-making, and graphic storytelling function as both reflective and generative practices, surfacing emotional insights, social commitments, and emergent strategies often excluded from conventional faculty development. With members drawn from STEM fields, traditionally among the least equitable, we argue that these arts-based practices in CoTs can support resistant, hopeful infrastructures for change, enabling members to model practices like rest as resistance and radical hope in their local contexts