Threshold Concepts in the Engineering Educator's Journey: A Systematic Review

Abstract

CONTEXT Many engineering educators recognize and emphasize the key concepts and skills that are considerably more difficult and that hinder their learners' progress through their undergraduate studies. Many of these topics are considered threshold concepts and make the difference in a student's ability to do engineering things versus being an engineer. What many engineering educators don't recognize is that they too encounter threshold concepts that hinder their own journey to becoming effective educators. PURPOSE OR GOAL Unfortunately, there is no analysis of studies of threshold concepts that identify those associated with teaching in either undergraduate engineering programs or post-secondary education in general. This study seeks to answer two questions about teaching-related threshold concepts: (1) what threshold concepts are identified as part of an educator's growth? and (2) what threshold concepts may cause a transformation in the way engineering educators carry out their day-to-day practices? APPROACH OR METHODOLOGY/METHODS This paper reports the findings of a qualitative evidence synthesis (qualitative systematic review) of 20 journal articles and conference papers that study threshold concepts related to teaching in the post-secondary system. An initial search for studies of any design that examined threshold concepts related to teaching practice identified 1011 potential papers, 82 of which met the criteria for initial review. A deeper secondary review narrowed the list to 20 papers. ACTUAL OR ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES Final review identified 14 threshold concepts associated with post-secondary educators' professional growth ranging from care and authenticity to course-related threshold concepts. These 14 threshold concepts were mapped to categories of Science, Technology, Mathematics and Engineering (STEM) educator practices and conceptions. Four clusters were identified in which mastery of the threshold concept could facilitate a change in day-today practice of engineering educators: teaching/pedagogy, learning, assessment, and teaching with technology. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS/SUMMARY This study fills a gap in the literature by identifying teaching-related threshold concepts that may hinder the instructional development of engineering educators. It is hoped that these results will encourage engineering educators, and those responsible for their educational development, to recognize and support professional growth related to these potential thresholds.