Identifying Signature Pedagogies in a Multidisciplinary Engineering Program

This work-in-progress is part of a larger research and evaluation project designed to realign program goals with teaching and learning practices in a large, multi-disciplinary engineering program at a research-oriented Canadian university. The ultimate goal of this work is to define and develop a set of key teaching and learning practices that reflect program goals and future directions. In particular, key program priorities include curriculum integration, inter- and multi-disciplinary thinking, working from first principles, and the development of problem framing skills to support the pursuit of research and entrepreneurship. In this work, we draw from Shulman's work on signature pedagogies [1], which defines them as the modes of teaching and learning that are unique to a particular discipline or profession. Shulman describes signature pedagogies using three "structural dimensions": (1) Surface Structure, or the concrete operational acts; (2) Deep Structure, or the assumptions and decision-making that takes place in designing educational experiences; and (3) Implicit Structure, or the hidden curriculum. Signature pedagogies demonstrate to students what is accepted as credible knowledge, practice and culture in their future profession. In this particular case, we attempt to apply the concept of signature pedagogies to a multidisciplinary program that, despite its engagement with a multitude of more traditional disciplines, holds its own philosophy of teaching and learning. As a first step in working towards these signature pedagogies, we have conducted a series of semi-structured interviews with a group of select program faculty, providing a rich description of how instructors position the program in the larger engineering landscape, how they describe the learners in the program, and how they construct learning experiences. Through a thematic analysis of the interviews, an implicit and deep structure of a signature pedagogy emerged that has endured in the program. This implicit pedagogy enacted by faculty members enculturates students with attitudes, values and dispositions supported by the program [2]. Key themes constructing this implicit pedagogy include: (1) the importance of working with abstract knowledge and "pure math and science" as a point of "rigour"; (2) the relevance of preserving traditions and reputation to pedagogical choice; (3) the disciplinary perspectives held by instructors coming from multiple disciplines themselves; and (4) a "drinking from a firehose" metaphor, suggesting that instructors believe that students can manage a large volume of knowledge and practice, which in turn defines the teaching philosophy of the faculty members. Tingerthal [3] suggests that there is no consensus on the signature pedagogy of engineering. Our research serves as a case study in the identification of a signature pedagogy in a multi-disciplinary engineering program, and highlights the tensions and challenges in the process of framing and defining it. The findings of this work will support the emergence of an understanding of signature pedagogies in multidisciplinary programs. Results of the interviews are used to develop a questionnaire to survey a larger sample of program faculty and alumni. References L. S. Shulman, "Signature Pedagogies in the Professions," Daedalus, vol. 134, no. 3, pp. 52–59, 2005. [Online]. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20027998. {Accessed Dec. 15, 2019]. Kumar, Swapna. "Signature pedagogy, implementation and evaluation of an online program that impacts educational practice." The Internet and Higher Education 21 (2014): 60-67. J. Tingerthal, "Work in Progress: Signature Pedagogies in Engineering - Surface Structure," in 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings, 2017, vol. 2017-June.