The UCEM’s is rooted in the approach that shared responsibility by faculty champions, students and stakeholders can be a catalyst for increased diversity (Whittaker, 2012; Allen-Ramdial, 2014), and institutional change (Thompson, 2013) within STEM graduate departments. Borrowing from lessons learned of the NSF’s Engineering Research Center (National Academies, 2017) and organizational management literature (Perry, 2017; Hunter, 2011; Kotter, 1996), the UCEM is structured (See Figure below) to encourage strategic planning, incentivize continual engagement of faculty champions, and promote coordination with institutional offices to maximize each scholar’s opportunity for success and professional/personal well-being.
USF UCEM Inclusive Excellence Model
Allen-Ramdial, S. A. A., & Campbell, A. G. (2014). Reimagining the pipeline: advancing STEM diversity, persistence, and success. BioScience, 64: 612-618.
Thompson, N. L., & Campbell, A. G. (2013). Addressing the challenge of diversity in the graduate ranks: good practices yield good outcomes. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12(1), 19-29.
Whittaker, J. A., & Montgomery, B. L. (2012). Cultivating diversity and competency in STEM: Challenges and remedies for removing virtual barriers to constructing diverse higher education communities of success. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, 11(1), A44-A55
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. A New Vision for Center-Based Engineering Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24767
Sara Jansen Perry, Emily M. Hunter, Steven C. Currall, Ed Frauenheim (2017) Developing Engineering Leaders: An Organized Innovation Approach to Engineering Education, Engineering Management Journal, 29:2, 99-107, DOI:
Hunter, E.M., Perry, S.J., & Currall, S.C. (2011). Inside Multi-Disciplinary Science and Engineering
Research Centers: The Impact of Organizational Climate on Invention Disclosures and Patents. Research Policy, 40, 1226-1239.
Kotter, J. (1996). Leading change: Why transformations fail. Harvard Business Review.