Research in Engineering Education Symposium 2011 - rees2009

Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM) Página 280 de 957
• What portion of class time includes faculty and student questions and
answers?
• What portion of class time includes active learning?
• How do engineering faculty’s perceptions compare with their behavior?
The answers to these research questions are important to engineering education as they
provide abaseline from which to measure change. They also are an essential first step in
the design and implementation of data-driven institutional change at our College of
Engineering. The data we collect will allow us to identify research-based effective teaching
practices that are presently in use and target those practices that would be best to adopt in
our context. Additionally, understanding ways that faculty perceptions of their teaching
aligns or does not align with actual practice will allow us to better support the adoption of
effective practices.
Theoretical Framework
There are three key components to our evidence-based approach to enabling institutional
change (Figure 1). First, we will ground our work in existing research about faculty
teaching practices shown to be effective in promoting student engagement and success.
Second, we will situate this research in the local institutional context, building on local
evidence and understanding the local reward structureand motivators for faculty change.
And third, our work will be informed by theories of learning, faculty development, and
institutional change. The latter component offers several useful frameworks.
Figure 1. Our Model for Institutional Change
Proceedings of Research in Engineering Education Symposium 2011
Madrid, 4 th - 7 th October 2011