Conference Session

Faculty Development and Change

Collection

2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Xiaping Li, University of Michigan

Tagged Divisions

Faculty Development Division (FDD)

active learning hasremained slower than might be expected, particularly in engineering programs thattraditionally rely on extensive lectures with a focus on solving well-defined problems.For instance, Hall et al. analyzed a shift from lecture‐based to active‐learning strategies in anMIT engineering course, examining motivations for this change and strategies to surmountimplementation challenges [26]. Although some instructors made progress, the processremained difficult, in part because altering how a course is taught often requires deeperadjustments to teaching beliefs, classroom management, and course structure than alteringwhat is taught [26]. Borda et al. also observed that STEM faculty, including those inengineering, encountered barriers

Conference Session

Faculty Development: Broad Impact

Collection

2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jay Mann, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign; Ali Ansari, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign; Wayne L Chang, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign; Caroline Cvetkovic, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign; Holly M Golecki, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign; Ramez Hajj, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign

Tagged Divisions

Faculty Development Division (FDD)

this space? 10 Despite the attention paid to diversity and equity in official program messages, to what extent do you feel support from your department/college to improve your teaching and the learning experiences of all students?To explore the culture and challenges of equity-minded teaching in the engineering curricula, theanalysis of the journal entries was limited to the contributions from the five engineering facultyresearch members only. Each journal entry was first anonymized upon submission to the centralrepository and then inductively coded (1) originally by individual CoP members and then (2)reviewed, refined, and re-coded collaboratively during a CoP meeting. As codes were identifiedfrom the