View in EDS

Defining the capabilities required to teach engineering: Insights for achieving the Australian sector's future vision.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Defining the capabilities required to teach engineering: Insights for achieving the Australian sector's future vision.
Authors: Dart, Sarah1 (AUTHOR) sarah.dart@qut.edu.au, Cunningham, Sam1 (AUTHOR), Gregg, Alexander2 (AUTHOR), Young, Amy1 (AUTHOR)
Source: Australasian Journal of Engineering Education. May2023, Vol. 28 Issue 1, p47-58. 12p.
Subjects: Career development, Engineering education, Educational quality, Engineering, Effective teaching
Abstract: Professional engineering practice is being transformed by technological developments, globalisation, and changes in societal expectations. In response, approaches to engineering education must advance to better prepare graduates for the demands of industry. However, the criteria currently used by universities to appoint and promote academics do not appropriately prioritise teaching quality, which impedes educational quality enhancement. This study sought to refine the categories of teaching capability proposed in the Engineering 2035 Project (which reviewed the state of Australian engineering education), given these categories lacked the detail necessary to inform policy. Transcripts of interviews with 21 engineering educators were thematically analysed to identify the key skills required of engineering educators. Mapping of interview themes to the seven capabilities proposed in the Engineering 2035 Project revealed gaps in three pedagogically-driven areas related to communicating complex engineering concepts to actively engage students, creating empathetic learning environments, and subject management. New extended descriptors for ten teaching capabilities were developed. We argue that these capabilities must be valued within universities to drive improvement in engineering education quality. Thus, the proposed capability descriptors should be used to inform criteria for recruiting and promoting academics, guide professional development strategy, and evidence educator quality during accreditation processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Australasian Journal of Engineering Education is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Engineering Source
Description
Abstract:Professional engineering practice is being transformed by technological developments, globalisation, and changes in societal expectations. In response, approaches to engineering education must advance to better prepare graduates for the demands of industry. However, the criteria currently used by universities to appoint and promote academics do not appropriately prioritise teaching quality, which impedes educational quality enhancement. This study sought to refine the categories of teaching capability proposed in the Engineering 2035 Project (which reviewed the state of Australian engineering education), given these categories lacked the detail necessary to inform policy. Transcripts of interviews with 21 engineering educators were thematically analysed to identify the key skills required of engineering educators. Mapping of interview themes to the seven capabilities proposed in the Engineering 2035 Project revealed gaps in three pedagogically-driven areas related to communicating complex engineering concepts to actively engage students, creating empathetic learning environments, and subject management. New extended descriptors for ten teaching capabilities were developed. We argue that these capabilities must be valued within universities to drive improvement in engineering education quality. Thus, the proposed capability descriptors should be used to inform criteria for recruiting and promoting academics, guide professional development strategy, and evidence educator quality during accreditation processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:22054952
DOI:10.1080/22054952.2023.2214461