Charting the Development Sociotechnical Thinking in Engineering Students and Professionals

工程问题从根本上说是社会技术问题;它们以广泛而复杂的方式塑造社会、文化、政治、环境和其他背景因素，并被这些因素塑造。工程中的社会技术思维强调技术解决方案嵌入在社会背景中，理解工程解决方案和社会技术因素之间的相互作用对于设计有效的解决方案至关重要。为了帮助工程师进行社会技术思考，我们需要了解他们对社会技术因素的理解和推理是如何演变的。虽然社会技术思维是一种关键的工程能力，但从新手到专家的过程还没有得到很好的理解。本计画将结合联合收割机认知科学与社会技术设计理论，以描绘工程中社会技术思考的发展。我们将使用基于工程师的设计任务来研究工程师思考和推理社会技术因素的方式，并特别关注这种推理随着工程师在教育和实践中获得经验而发展的方式。我们还将使用访谈来调查经验，使工程师能够更深入地思考和推理社会技术因素。这项研究的结果将是一个社会技术发展的模型，它表征了社会技术思维的相关方面（例如，道德影响、利益相关者参与、环境考虑、社会/文化影响）以及工程师在获得经验时对这些维度进行推理的不同方式。这项研究将深入了解工程师如何开发新的观点，观点以及思维和推理方式。通过收集来自具有不同经验水平的学生和专业人士的数据，该模型可以为工程教育工作者提供一张地图，以便在教育和实践中以适合发展的方式进行学习，从而培养出一支能够通过创新解决方案更有效地解决复杂问题的工程队伍。该项目将在两个连续的研究阶段使用定性方法。在第一阶段，我们将使用从工程专业学生和具有不同经验水平的专业人士收集的数据创建社会技术思维的发展模型。我们将收集定性数据，通过基于设计活动，引起社会技术的考虑和回顾性焦点小组，允许后续和更深入的探索。我们将结合工程和认知发展中的社会技术思维理论来分析数据，反复应用演绎和归纳编码。由此产生的模型将描述工程中社会技术思维的两个关键方面：1）发展发生的相关维度沿着，2）工程师思考和推理这些维度的不同方式。横截面抽样将使社会技术思维的进展，根据工程经验的调查。第二阶段将通过访谈使用递归数据收集，以探索社会技术思维中形成经验的主题。认知发展经常被不和谐和解决的时刻打断，面试将集中在社会技术思维的形成经验。我们将根据参与者的发展类别对他们进行分层，并从第一阶段招募参与者，以探索促进社会技术思维增长或变化的工程经验。为了帮助工程师有效地进行社会技术思维，教育工作者还必须了解社会技术思维如何在不同教育水平和经验的工程师之间变化和变化。专注于关键工程技能的发展方面，可以在课程设计和专业发展方面为工程教育工作者提供信息。这项工作的结果将为工程教育和实践提供信息，从而促进更周到的工程实践和更好、更合适的工程解决方案。该奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

Engineering problems are fundamentally sociotechnical; they both shape and are shaped by social, cultural, political, environmental, and other contextual factors in vast and complex ways. Sociotechnical thinking in engineering emphasizes that technical solutions are embedded in social contexts, and understanding the interaction between engineering solutions and sociotechnical factors is vital to designing effective solutions. To help engineers engage in sociotechnical thinking, we need to understand how their understanding and reasoning about sociotechnical factors evolves. While sociotechnical thinking is a critical engineering competence, the progression from novice to expert is not well understood. This project will combine cognitive science with sociotechnical design theories to chart the development of sociotechnical thinking in engineering. We will use scenario-based design tasks to examine the ways engineers think and reason sociotechnical factors and focus specifically on the ways this reasoning evolves as engineers gain experience in education and practice. We will also use interviews to investigate experiences that enable engineers to think and reason more deeply about sociotechnical factors. The outcome of this research will be a model of sociotechnical development that characterizes the relevant dimensions of sociotechnical thinking (e.g., ethical implications, stakeholder engagement, environmental considerations, social/cultural impact) and the different ways engineers reason about those dimensions as they gain experience. This research will offer insight into how engineers develop new outlooks, perspectives, and ways of thinking and reasoning. By collecting data from students and professionals with different levels of experience, the model can provide a map for engineering educators to scaffold learning in developmentally appropriate ways across education and practice, resulting in an engineering workforce that can solve complex problems more effectively with innovative solutions. This project will use qualitative methodologies across two sequential research phases. In Phase 1 we will create a developmental model of sociotechnical thinking using data collected from engineering students and professionals with varying levels of experience. We will collect qualitative data through scenario-based design activities that elicit sociotechnical considerations and retrospective focus groups that allow for follow-up and deeper exploration. We will analyze the data using a combination of theories of sociotechnical thinking in engineering and cognitive development, iteratively applying deductive and inductive coding. The resulting model will describe two key aspects of sociotechnical thinking in engineering: 1) the relevant dimensions along which development occurs and 2) the qualitatively different ways engineers think and reason about those dimensions. Cross-sectional sampling will enable investigation of the progression in sociotechnical thinking according to engineering experience. Phase 2 will use recursive data collection through interviews to explore themes in formational experiences in sociotechnical thinking. Cognitive development is often punctuated by moments of dissonance and resolution, and interviews will focus on formative experiences in sociotechnical thinking. We will stratify our participants according to their developmental categories and recruit participants from Phase 1 to explore engineering experiences that promoted growth or change in sociotechnical thinking. To help engineers effectively engage in sociotechnical thinking, educators must also understand how sociotechnical thinking changes and varies across engineers with different levels of education and experience. Focusing on developmental aspects of a critical engineering skill can inform engineering educators in terms of curriculum design and professional development. The results of this work will inform engineering education and practice in ways that can promote more thoughtful engineering practices and better, more appropriate engineering solutions.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.