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

Figures & data

Figure 1. TPACK framework; adapted from Mishra and Koehler (Mishra and Koehler 2006).

Table 1. Background characteristics of interview sample; *note that since multiple activities may be performed in a teaching role, the percentage of participants sums to greater than 100%.

Characteristic		Number of Participants	Percentage of Participants
Gender	Male	14	67%
	Female	6	28%
	Prefer not to say	1	5%
Engineering discipline	Mechanical	7	32%
	Electrical	6	29%
	Mechatronics	2	10%
	Civil	1	5%
	Other	5	24%
Teaching Experience	1–3 years	2	10%
	3–5 years	4	19%
	5–10 years	8	38%
	10+ years	7	33%
Appointment Type	Casual/Sessional Academic	5	24%
	Level B - Lecturer	5	24%
	Level C- Senior Lecturer	5	24%
	Level D - Associate Professor	2	9%
	Level E – Professor	3	14%
	Other	1	5%
Activities Performed in Role*	Marking	18	86%
	Running tutorials and/or practicals	17	81%
	Curriculum development	17	81%
	Subject coordination	15	71%
	Lecturing	15	71%
	Learning and teaching leadership	12	57%
University Grouping	Group of Eight	5	24%
	Australian Technology Network	9	43%
	Other	7	33%

Table 2. Summary of final themes from analysis of interview transcripts including frequency of occurrence.

Theme	Theme Frequency (out of 21 participants)	Key Factors	Factor Frequency (out of 21 participants)
Learning Facilitation	19	Creating engaging learning experiences	15
		Teaching with technology	15
Empathy Towards Students	17	Responsive to student needs	10
		Approachability	9
		Understanding of diversity	5
Technical Knowledge	15	Technical skills	13
		Communicating complex engineering concepts	10
Authentic Contextualisation	13	Understanding professional engineering practice	12
		Contextualising concepts	6
Adaptability	13	Flexibility	8
		Willingness to innovate using evidence	8
Subject Management	12	Subject coordination	11
		Subject structure and organisation	5

Table 3. Proposed teaching capabilities including mapping of interview themes to Engineering 2035 Project capabilities in Burnett et al. (2021).

Teaching Capability		Related Capabilities from Burnett et al. (2021).	Related Themes from Analysis of Educator Interviews
1	Continuously improve teaching approaches based on evidence drawn from a range of sources including educational research, student and peer feedback, assessment outcomes, and observed cohort needs.	Change in teaching practice	Adaptability
2	Embed learning experiences authentic to professional engineering practice including collaboration with complementary disciplines to solve complex open-ended problems incorporating uncertainty.	Integrating real-world situations in teaching	Authentic Contextualisation, Technical Knowledge
3	Use contemporary digital technologies to interpret, manipulate, communicate, and solve engineering problems.	Using digital technologies to model engineering problems	Authentic Contextualisation, Technical Knowledge
4	Embed collaborations with industry and community organisations in teaching.	Increasing industry collaboration	Authentic Contextualisation
5	Integrate the human and social dimensions of engineering in learning designs to develop students’ professional skills.	Integrating human/social dimensions within technical contexts	Authentic Contextualisation
6	Incorporate educational technologies into teaching to effectively engage students in blended and online modes of learning.	Using e-learning	Learning Facilitation
7	Engage in and gain recognition for ongoing professional development as an engineering educator, while supporting the professional learning of others such as through mentoring and dissemination of effective practice.	Professional development as an engineer educator	Adaptability
8	Effectively communicate engineering concepts to actively engage students in learning.	Not applicable	Learning Facilitation, Technical Knowledge
9	Create an empathetic learning environment that responds to diverse student needs.	Not applicable	Empathy Towards Students
10	Provide subject management including of teaching teams, resources, budgets, curricula, structure, and organisation of students.	Not applicable	Subject Management

Figure 2. Alignment of academic teaching capabilities proposed in Table 3 to TPACK framework.

Mishra, P., and M. J. Koehler. 2006. “Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge.” Teachers College Record 108 (6): 1017–1054. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Burnett, I., Crosthwaite, C., Foley, B., Hargreaves, D., King, R., Lamborn, J., Lawrence, R., Reidsema, C., Symes, M., and Wilson, J. 2021. “Engineering Change: The Future of Engineering Education in Australia.” [Online]. Available: https://www.aced.edu.au/downloads/2021%20Engineering%20Change%20-%20The%20future%20of%20engineering%20education%20in%20Australia.pdf

 Google Scholar