Enhancement of Faculty Competence

Enhancement of faculty competence in both engineering skills and in teaching, learning, and assessment methods. 

CDIO programs should provide support for faculty members to improve their own competence in personal and interpersonal skills, and product, process, and system building skills as described in the Syllabus. The nature and scope of faculty development varies with the resources and intentions of each program and institution. Examples of actions that enhance faculty competence include professional leave to work in industry, partnerships with industry colleagues in research and education projects, inclusion of engineering practice as a criterion for hiring and promotion, and appropriate professional development experiences at the university. Enhancement of faculty competence in professional skills related to the CDIO Syllabus is the focus of Standard 9. 

A benchmarking study and needs analysis of faculty competence has been conducted 0 There are no programs or practices to enhance faculty competence in personal, interpersonal, product, process, and system building skills... 

Over the years, there has been an evolution from a focus on affirmative action and equity, wherein diversity and inclusion efforts are seen as benefiting only those who have been underrepresented and underserved, to a focus on diversity and inclusion as a resource that enhances the learning of all students and the effectiveness and competence of faculty and staff (Williams Wade-Golden, 2007). In other words, diversity and inclusion are increasingly viewed as critical elements of institutional and academic excellence. 

Shifting the traditional view of assessment to a more learner-centered approach is a challenge because engineering faculty tend to rely on the same assessment methods that were used in their own engineering studies, for example, problem sets and written exams. Support for enhancing faculty competence in assessment methods is described in Chap. 8. 

The implications for taxonomy and rubric development and use in terms of enhancing perspectives of engineering faculty for competency development are significant. A student-centered focus is required to develop useful taxonomies based on what students learn to know, value and do in competency-based learning. The potential impact of authentic and personalized assessment of competency development, and the opportunities for researching and assessing results of competency development initiatives as a part of mechanical engineering DNA are all noteworthy benefits. 

By using the resources available to them, programs can go about systematically enhancing the competence of the faculty in engineering skills as well as in active and experiential learning and student assessment. 

---