  This paper empirically argues for a closer examination of what we wish to
retain when we speak of "retention" in engineering [1]. We present and
interpret data from clinical interviews and classroom video of "Michael," a
student who feels marginalized by an engineering program that undervalues him
because of his stance toward knowledge [2],[3]. Michael is a sophomore
Electrical Engineering and Mathematics major in a Basic Circuits course. In his
own words, he's a "fringe" student because of his robust tendency to try making
sense of the concepts being taught rather than memorizing formulae. He also
feels alienated because he views learning in terms of argument and intuition,
not algorithm and rote acceptance. Furthermore, for Michael the practice of
sense-making defines him; it's an integral aspect of his identity [4]. Thus,
Michael's self-reported sense of alienation resonates strongly with existing
identity-based accounts of students leaving the field [5],[6]. We contend the
field of engineering suffers if individuals like Michael don't pursue it.
Through this case study of Michael, we urge the retention discussion to
consider not just the demographic categories of people we hope to keep, but
also the approaches to knowledge, learning, and problem-solving we aim to
support.
