東華大學圖書館 |

Engineering Designers' Engagement and Inclusion of Diverse Perspectives in Engineering Work.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Engineering Designers' Engagement and Inclusion of Diverse Perspectives in Engineering Work./
Author:	Loweth, Robert P.
Description:	1 online resource (308 pages)
Notes:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-01, Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International84-01B.
Subject:	Engineering. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=29274990click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798438780823

Engineering Designers' Engagement and Inclusion of Diverse Perspectives in Engineering Work.
Loweth, Robert P.

Engineering Designers' Engagement and Inclusion of Diverse Perspectives in Engineering Work. - 1 online resource (308 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-01, Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Michigan, 2022.

Includes bibliographical references

Engineering is a sociotechnical discipline. Sociotechnical aspects of engineering work manifest in the societal impacts of engineering, the interactions between engineers and other engineers and stakeholders, and the societal norms or biases that engineers embed in their work. Given the interconnected nature of modern engineering problems, it is crucially important that engineers recognize and attend to the sociotechnical aspects of their work. Thus, there is a need for tools and pedagogies that support engineers in engaging with sociotechnical aspects of engineering work. Our goals for this dissertation were to: 1) deepen understandings of how engineering students and practitioners engage with sociotechnical aspects of engineering work and 2) identify aspects of engineering students' and practitioners' perspectives and approaches that are transferrable to other engineering contexts and may thus inform tools and pedagogies. Chapters 2 and 3 of this dissertation investigated how engineering students and practitioners conceptualized sociotechnical aspects of engineering work based on their experiences. We synthesized eight statements that captured different sociotechnical aspects of engineering and, during interviews, asked participants to select two statements that aligned well with their experiences and two statements that did not align well. We also asked participants to share stories related to their selected statements and analyzed these stories to identify participants' beliefs about engineering work resulting from their experiences. We found that engineering students and practitioners both highlighted their engineering collaborations, more so than other sociotechnical aspects of engineering work. However, engineering students and practitioners understood the importance of collaboration differently. Engineering students, in particular, indicated that effective collaborations did not require engineers to build close interpersonal relationships. Chapters 4-6 investigated how engineering students engaged stakeholders in co-curricular and capstone contexts. Chapter 4 explored the needs assessment experiences of a co-curricular design team. During interviews, participants described several recommended practices for needs assessments, e.g., consulting diverse stakeholders, that they learned through their training and field work. Participants also described several challenges, e.g., accessing certain stakeholders, that impacted their approaches. Chapters 5 and 6 explored how six mechanical engineering capstone design teams engaged stakeholders to inform their projects. In Chapter 5, we analyzed recordings of participants' meetings with stakeholders and identified 22 distinct information gathering behaviors that participants exhibited during their meetings. Half of these behaviors aligned with recommended practices, and half did not align. We built upon these findings in Chapter 6 by analyzing additional data, including interviews with participants. We uncovered two main trends: 1) participants prioritized domain experts as information sources and 2) participants preferred early and decisive information gathering meetings. Based on our findings, we have several recommendations for engineering education, practice, and research. Instructors should highlight the diverse ways that engineering is a sociotechnical discipline, teach students a range of approaches for engaging stakeholders, support students in gathering and analyzing multiple types of stakeholder data, and structure students' stakeholder engagement opportunities to encourage effective engagement approaches. In addition, engineering practitioners and students can use our lists of recommended stakeholder engagement practices in Chapters 4-6 to guide their stakeholder engagement approaches. Lastly, we recommend that engineering design and education researchers attend to the diverse ways that engineering is a sociotechnical discipline in their studies of engineering students and practitioners to more fully understand how various sociotechnical aspects of engineering work are connected.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2023

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798438780823Subjects--Topical Terms:

586835
Engineering.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Stakeholder engagementIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

542853
Electronic books.

Engineering Designers' Engagement and Inclusion of Diverse Perspectives in Engineering Work.
LDR:05645nmm a2200445K 4500 001 2353758
005 20230313091345.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 241011s2022 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798438780823
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI29274990
035 $a (MiAaPQ)umichrackham004198
035 $a AAI29274990
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Loweth, Robert P. $3 3694088
245 1 0 $a Engineering Designers' Engagement and Inclusion of Diverse Perspectives in Engineering Work.
264 0 $c 2022
300 $a 1 online resource (308 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-01, Section: B.
500 $a Advisor: Daly, Shanna R.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Michigan, 2022.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Engineering is a sociotechnical discipline. Sociotechnical aspects of engineering work manifest in the societal impacts of engineering, the interactions between engineers and other engineers and stakeholders, and the societal norms or biases that engineers embed in their work. Given the interconnected nature of modern engineering problems, it is crucially important that engineers recognize and attend to the sociotechnical aspects of their work. Thus, there is a need for tools and pedagogies that support engineers in engaging with sociotechnical aspects of engineering work. Our goals for this dissertation were to: 1) deepen understandings of how engineering students and practitioners engage with sociotechnical aspects of engineering work and 2) identify aspects of engineering students' and practitioners' perspectives and approaches that are transferrable to other engineering contexts and may thus inform tools and pedagogies. Chapters 2 and 3 of this dissertation investigated how engineering students and practitioners conceptualized sociotechnical aspects of engineering work based on their experiences. We synthesized eight statements that captured different sociotechnical aspects of engineering and, during interviews, asked participants to select two statements that aligned well with their experiences and two statements that did not align well. We also asked participants to share stories related to their selected statements and analyzed these stories to identify participants' beliefs about engineering work resulting from their experiences. We found that engineering students and practitioners both highlighted their engineering collaborations, more so than other sociotechnical aspects of engineering work. However, engineering students and practitioners understood the importance of collaboration differently. Engineering students, in particular, indicated that effective collaborations did not require engineers to build close interpersonal relationships. Chapters 4-6 investigated how engineering students engaged stakeholders in co-curricular and capstone contexts. Chapter 4 explored the needs assessment experiences of a co-curricular design team. During interviews, participants described several recommended practices for needs assessments, e.g., consulting diverse stakeholders, that they learned through their training and field work. Participants also described several challenges, e.g., accessing certain stakeholders, that impacted their approaches. Chapters 5 and 6 explored how six mechanical engineering capstone design teams engaged stakeholders to inform their projects. In Chapter 5, we analyzed recordings of participants' meetings with stakeholders and identified 22 distinct information gathering behaviors that participants exhibited during their meetings. Half of these behaviors aligned with recommended practices, and half did not align. We built upon these findings in Chapter 6 by analyzing additional data, including interviews with participants. We uncovered two main trends: 1) participants prioritized domain experts as information sources and 2) participants preferred early and decisive information gathering meetings. Based on our findings, we have several recommendations for engineering education, practice, and research. Instructors should highlight the diverse ways that engineering is a sociotechnical discipline, teach students a range of approaches for engaging stakeholders, support students in gathering and analyzing multiple types of stakeholder data, and structure students' stakeholder engagement opportunities to encourage effective engagement approaches. In addition, engineering practitioners and students can use our lists of recommended stakeholder engagement practices in Chapters 4-6 to guide their stakeholder engagement approaches. Lastly, we recommend that engineering design and education researchers attend to the diverse ways that engineering is a sociotechnical discipline in their studies of engineering students and practitioners to more fully understand how various sociotechnical aspects of engineering work are connected.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2023
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Engineering. $3 586835
650 4 $a Mechanical engineering. $3 649730
650 4 $a Operations research. $3 547123
650 4 $a Industrial engineering. $3 526216
650 4 $a Behavioral sciences. $3 529833
650 4 $a Science education. $3 521340
653 $a Stakeholder engagement
653 $a Engineering education
653 $a Societal implications of engineering
653 $a Engineering teamwork
653 $a Engineering design
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 lcsh $3 542853
690 $a 0548
690 $a 0537
690 $a 0796
690 $a 0602
690 $a 0546
690 $a 0714
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 783688
710 2 $a University of Michigan. $b Mechanical Engineering. $3 2104815
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 84-01B.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=29274990 $z click for full text (PQDT)