(Re)defining Resilience: How Engineering Educators Understand and Teach Resilience

ID	RELEVANT PARTICIPANT INFORMATION
1	White female academic with industry experience. Involved in curriculum design and student engagement.
2	White male academic acting as Employability Mentor responsible for industry placements.
3	White male academic with industrial background and involved in training of graduate engineers. Employability Mentor responsible for industry placements.
4	Arab male academic Teaches a variety of cohorts of various sizes at different levels. Experience in the UK and internationally.
5	White male research focused professor. Teaches small cohort sizes. Experience teaching in a variety of UK-based universities.
6	White female Programme Director. Teaches variety of students at different levels.
7	White male early career academic, multidisciplinary teaching.
8	White male early career researcher, experienced teaching assistant and involved in supporting research students.
9	White male cross-discipline careers consultant.
10	Asian male research-focused academic. Teaches on a variety of engineering programs and cohorts of varying sizes. Experience in the UK and internationally.
11	White male research-focused professor. Teaches small cohorts of up to 40.
12	White male research-focused professor. Teaches small cohorts of up to 40.
13	White female teaching focused professor with experience in industry.

Table 2

A summary of the overarching themes and sub themes.

THEME NAME	SUB-THEME NAME	SUB THEME SUMMARY
Theme 1: Contradictions and conflicting views	Sub-theme 1: Extremes in understanding: “People kept telling me that that wasn’t what resilience was.”	Describes extreme differences in the way that resilience was conceptualized by the participants.
	Sub-theme 2: Do emotion and empathy help or hinder resilience?	Concentrates on opposing views regarding the role of emotion, care, and motivation in influencing resilience.
	Sub-theme 3: Being pulled in all directions.	Focuses on the conflicting demands placed on educators and the impact that this has on their ability to promote resilience.
Theme 2: Where to draw the line	Sub-theme 1: Resilience as highly individual but impacted by the system.	Focuses on the degree to which “the system” in which an individual resides limits their ability to develop resilience, and thus the limits placed on educators’ roles.
	Sub-theme 2: Roles and responsibilities of the educator.	Concentrates on the types of resilience which fall under the remit of engineering educators, and the way in which their work is boundaried.
	Sub-theme 3: How far is too far?	Focuses on the extent to which educators should push students and create environments in which students develop resilience.
	Sub-theme 4: Can you be too resilient?	Focuses on where individuals draw a line when deciding how resilient they are willing to be.
Theme 3: Perception versus reality: resilience as invisible		Focuses on the indicators of resilience and the ways in which educators determine and understand the resilience level of students.