2026 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

This research paper examines the barriers and affordances that engineering faculty and staff members perceive for pedagogical innovation within a single institution. Despite the urgent need for pedagogical change in engineering, the adoption of research-based pedagogies and innovation has been slow. Pedagogical innovation in engineering education has been a critical area of research driven by the need for the development of more well-rounded engineers with critical competencies for industry and supported by new technological advancements. Different researchers have suggested that the academic culture in engineering can influence the pace of pedagogical change, making it necessary to characterize the elements that faculty perceive as impactful for innovation. In this qualitative study, we interviewed two faculty members and three staff member, an academic advisor, a chair and director of development from an R1 research institution to explore their perspectives and experiences with pedagogical innovations within their current institution, focusing on engineering culture. We analyzed the interviews using a hybrid thematic approach guided by an initial set of codes that explored barriers and affordances by departmental, administrative, and engineering characteristics. During the process, we refined and reorganized the codes, identifying themes of affordances and barriers from the faculty perspective. These barriers were characterized in terms of administration, departments, and engineering culture, whereas the affordances were characterized in terms of engineering culture, institutional support, and change stakeholders. From our analysis, we found that students play a crucial role in these initiatives, serving as critical stakeholders who can potentially act as both barriers and affordances to pedagogical innovation. Additionally, some features of the academic cultural system in engineering were also discussed as key elements that can potentially foster or persuade the adoption of innovations. These findings could provide valuable insights for academic leaders and faculty developers who seek to foster pedagogical innovation in their institutions, enabling them to consider these views for alternative structures of support to address department-specific barriers.