LENS: A Model for Engineering Faculty Development

CONTEXTEngineering educators could benefit from a faculty development model that meets them where they are, in both their discipline and their journey as educators.It is often difficult to get academics to talk about their teaching as it relates to educational research, and research shows that those in engineering programs, even with a pandemic-imposed accommodation to delivery, participate in fewer educational development opportunities than their colleagues in other disciplines.This reluctance to develop as educators may help explain why student and faculty surveys of student engagement rank engineering educators lowest in the categories of effective teaching practices and providing a supportive learning environment. PURPOSE OR GOALThis work presents the LENS (Learning Environments Nurture Success) model of engineering faculty development.The six "lenses" represented in the LENS model align with the evidence-based characteristics of an effective learning environment for engineering students: (1) academic rigour, (2) focus on learning, (3) instructional support, (4) quality of teaching, (5) student-faculty relationships, and (6) student engagement. APPROACH OR METHODOLOGY/METHODSThe LENS model is based on a conceptual framework that draws on five key areas: (1) student success in engineering programs, (2) change and innovation in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) teaching, (3) threshold concepts associated with post-secondary teaching, (4) an educator's journey from novice to expert teacher, and (5) the findings of myriad studies in research-based instructional strategies (RBIS), discipline-based education research (DBER) in STEM programs, and engineering education research (EER).Each of these research areas shares a social constructivist viewpoint with a vision of students who are engaged, successful, and value their learning.ACTUAL OR ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES Following a literature review, each lens is defined, identifies commonly used instructional strategies, and suggests evidence-based strategies that can be implemented to enhance one's teaching practice.The breakdown provides level-appropriate recommendations for faculty at three stages of development: first-order change for those wanting to do things better, second-order change for those choosing to do better things, and third-order or epistemic change for those primed to make a transformational shift in their teaching. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS/SUMMARYThe LENS model contributes to the body of scholarly work associated with engineering faculty development by (1) offering a practical framework that supports educational development and planning for all forms of delivery (face-to-face, remote, blended, or hybrid) that can be used independently, in consultation with an Educational Developer, or in collaboration with colleagues, (2) threading educator-related threshold concepts associated with learning, pedagogy, and assessment through each of the six lenses, and (3) linking interdisciplinary research focused on facilitating the success of engineering students.