2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

This work-in-progress paper examines faculty interactions, the formation of relationships, and how teaching and learning discussions occur within academic settings. Relationships are important and vital in every sphere of social life. In the context of faculty members, relationships play a crucial part in developing individual and systemic capacity for engineering teaching and learning. This study aims to uncover how faculty members develop and leverage their relationships and communities. It also sheds light on the ways and situations in which faculty members interact with one another for diverse reasons and needs. This study is part of an overarching study aimed at assessing STEM education capacity through social network analysis and developing an instrument to inform capacity building efforts.

The purpose of this study is to understand the kinds of relationships and communities that are fostered among the faculty members and to whom they reach out when they need assistance and support. They could reach out in relation to their course content, course policies, or any random interaction regarding teaching and learning. We structured the interview questions around the Five Capabilities Model of Capacity, which splits on the construct of capacity into five capabilities: capability to (1) commit and engage, (2) carry out tasks, (3) relate and attract support, (4) adapt and self-renew, and (5) balance diversity with coherence. We selected this model because it is one of the only existing models of capacity which breaks the construct down into observable components. We used the 5C framework to align our interview questions with each dimension of the model.

In this phase of the study, we conducted five semi-structured interviews with different faculty members, with interviews ranging from 45 to 60 minutes. We selected participants based on their participation in community-based faculty development activities. We used MaxQDA software to perform qualitative coding and thematic analysis, using in-vivo and axial coding methods; and broad themes and categories were developed using the codes. We categorized codes based on the “who, what, and why” of the interactions. The codes were checked, verified, and discussed using a peer examination approach among the authors to ensure rigor in the study.

While the study yielded many interesting insights, the findings show that the 5C model of capabilities was not well-suited as a data collection model. Faculty members did not reach out to a specific set of people for each of the mentioned capabilities. Rather, we found that interactions and relationships are based on several factors, such as outcomes of casual interactions, community engagements and events, and sometimes random interactions in the hallways. Conversations related to instructional capacity building often did not start with that intention but rather emerged from more casual conversations. The initial findings suggest that interactions and relationships can emerge from various settings and occasions within the context of teaching and learning. These results indicate that capacity building manifests in diverse situations and satisfies divergent needs. We would like to present this paper as a lightning talk.