2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Background
Despite faculty development initiatives focused on pedagogy, the literature reveals descriptions of slow changes in faculty pedagogical transformation [1]. We contend that there is a missing focus on the science of learning and the impact of teacher-student interactions as the reason behind the low efficacy of faculty development activities in changing beliefs and behaviors [2]. To address this gap, this project seeks to broaden engineering teaching with theory-based educational resources (BETTER) through a Caring Science lens [3].

Objectives
Objective 1: Examine the impact over time of a faculty development curriculum grounded in a humanistic-educative framework for promoting a humanizing model to engineering education.
Objective 2: Examine the impact of a CoP as a faculty development opportunity to compel faculty to make active efforts to transform their beliefs and attitudes regarding the use of learning theory as part of their teaching practice.

Research Design/Program Description
This project uses a longitudinal, quasi-experimental, explanatory sequential mixed-methods design. The programming intervention is either via a 6-week in-person CoP (treatment group) or via a 6-modules of self-paced online learning (control group). Participants will be followed and evaluated (pre/post surveys, interviews, artifact collection, and observations) throughout the three years of project funding (NSF IUSE #######). This paper presents preliminary findings of cohort 1 that took place in summer 2023.

Results/Evaluation
Guided by the Faculty Learning Outcomes Assessment (FLOA) Framework, we applied validated quantitative instruments and qualitative approaches to collect and analyze data aligned with programming outcomes regarding appreciating pedagogy, applying pedagogical reasoning to course design, and utilizing teaching practices that enhance student learning [4, 5].
In our first iteration of BETTER, we found statistically significant changes pre/post via the General Teaching Scale [4] in the areas of awareness (p<0.019000), integration (p<0.000301), and emotion (p<0.038000).

Qualitatively, faculty reported making adaptations to their teaching and student interactions, including increasing welcoming behavior, trying to get to know students personally, and explaining reasoning behind their teaching, assessment, and grading practices. They also reported increasing flexibility toward students' lives outside of class and being willing to listen and demonstrate empathy toward the challenges students face in their personal lives. Faculty reported wanting to change even more, but they cited several barriers to making desired changes which will be presented.

Of interest when integrating study findings, although there was noted change in awareness and integration, qualitative data analysis revealed difficulty in extrapolating learning theory examples from different fields of study.

Conclusions
Most educational systems processes impede the preparation of students for the challenges they will face in their professional lives and call for a humanizing way of teaching. Our human-centered model will influence engineering faculty pedagogical beliefs to support student learning and retention, especially those traditionally underrepresented in engineering.

Future Plans
We are continuing to collect longitudinal data from cohort 1, including conducting course observations and artifact analysis (a figure of data collection will be presented). Cohort 2 recently concluded their programming and data collection is underway.