The monarch butterfly is one of the most easily recognized and frequently studied insects in the world, and has recently come into the spotlight of public attention and conservation concern because of declining numbers of individuals associated with both the eastern and western migrations. Historically, the larger eastern migration has received the most scientific attention, but this has been changing in recent years, and here we report the largest-ever attempt to map and characterize non-overwintering habitat for the western monarch butterfly. Across the environmentally and topographically complex western landscape, we include 8,427 observations of adults and juvenile monarchs, as well as 20,696 records from 13 milkweed host plant species. We find high heterogeneity of suitable habitats across the geographic range, with extensive concentrations in the California floristic province in particular. We also find habitat suitability for the butterfly to be structured primarily by host plant habitat associations, which are in turn structured by a diverse suite of climatic variables. These results add to our knowledge of range and occupancy determinants for migratory species and provide a tool that can be used by conservation biologists and researchers interested in interactions among climate, hosts and host-specific animals, and by managers for prioritizing future conservation actions at regional to watershed scales.

Background Mixed methods research designs in engineering education often frame the “mixed” aspect of the design from the perspective of data collection. However, intentional mixing throughout the research design—particularly during data analysis—may enable richer meta‐inferences about a phenomenon. Purpose This paper provides examples of strategies for mixing during data analysis in mixed methods program evaluation in engineering education. Although the context is program evaluation, the procedures are applicable in engineering education research more broadly. Scope/Method This review presents examples of mixed methods analysis strategies in the context of a data set with qualitative and quantitative data from a global engineering program at a large Mid‐Atlantic university. The structure of the examples presents mixed research questions, pragmatic purposes for such studies, and examples of different mixing strategies for the analysis stage. The mixing strategies highlighted include extreme case sampling, converting, creating a blended variable, blending variables and themes across strands, and cross‐case comparison. Conclusions This review of mixed methods in program evaluation prompted a reflection of processes in the design of studies, how the designs are described beyond the usual taxonomies in the mixed methods literature, and implications for the greater community of engineering education researchers. Five mixed methods designs were formulated around the mixing strategies.

h t t p s : / / j o u r n a l s. c o p m a d r i d. o rg / e j p a l c Data from a nationally representative survey suggests that 33% of women and 28% of men have experienced some form of physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime (Breiding, Chen, & Black, 2014). Research has focused on determining the characteristics and correlates of perpetrators in an attempt to capture the heterogeneity of perpetrators and subsequently reduce overall levels of violence (Bell & Naugle, 2008; Capaldi, Knoble, Shortt, & Kim, 2012). Understanding the processes involved in obtaining and documenting information regarding violence history and how this information is utilized is important to consider, as recognition of heterogeneity within this population may improve the ability to predict treatment outcome (Stoops, Bennett, & Vincent, 2010). Many efforts have been made to identify and categorize different types of male perpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV; e.g., Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart, 1994). Other studies have attempted to identify batterer subtypes to increase the effectiveness of interventions with a variety of aggression subtypes (

she also serves as a program assistant for the Center for Enhancement of Engineering Diversity and an advisor for international senior design projects in the Department of Mechanical Engineering. Ashley received her MS in Mechanical Engineering, MPH in Public Health Education, and BS in Mechanical Engineering from Virginia Tech. Her research interests include broadening participation in engineering, the integration of engineering education and international development, and building capacity in low and middle income countries through inclusive technical education.

No abstract