Defining and Assessing Systems Thinking in Diverse Engineering Populations

工程师在解决我们全球社会的复杂问题方面发挥着重要作用，例如获得水和全球医疗保健。雇主、政策制定者和教育工作者一致认为，工程师需要能够识别并将他们的工作所嵌入的系统的相关方面纳入他们的决策。迄今为止，指导教育工作者培养系统思维的研究有限，这些研究中很少有提供清晰和全面的定义，可以转化为教学方法和学习评估。该项目将开发和测试系统思维的定义，将其作为解决问题的整体方法，在这种方法中，工程问题与其组成部分、更大的社会文化背景以及随着时间的推移的潜在影响的联系和相互作用被识别并纳入决策。在工程领域，对系统思维的研究倾向于强调识别工程问题的潜在相关组成部分的能力，而不是这些组成部分如何嵌入更广泛的经济、社会文化和时间背景中，这些背景也必须为决策和解决方案提供信息。此外，系统思考的要素，例如对特定社会文化背景的认识或在跨学科团队成员之间协调工作的能力，并不总是被认为是核心工程技能。将这些专业技能视为工程的核心之外，可能会疏远那些与考虑和影响社会变革的工程系统相关的个人。更广泛地考虑什么是工程可能对女性和种族/少数民族学生特别相关，因为他们更有可能被吸引到与社会影响相关的工作中。本研究考察了不同专业人员之间的系统思维，以开发一种基于场景的评估工具，教育工作者和研究人员可以使用该工具来评估工程专业学生的系统思维能力，并有助于拓宽对核心工程技能的理解。本研究的主要目的是在工程中扩展系统思维的现有概念。该项目将定义和评估一系列专业知识的系统思维，并确定有助于这种专业知识的生活、教育和工作经验。这项研究将分为三个阶段。第一阶段包括对工程专业学生和实践者的访谈，以了解个人在系统思维方面的具体经验，他们用来解决复杂工程问题的方法，以及他们以前的生活、教育和工作经历与他们的系统思维实践和技能之间的关系。第二阶段包括“大声思考”的面试，在这个面试中，参与者会面对一个开放式的工程问题场景，并被要求讨论他们将如何探索一个可能的解决方案。这个阶段允许比较具有不同水平的系统思维技能的个体在解决问题时所采用的策略及其决策的基本原理。这一阶段将产生对不同层次的系统思维能力的深入理解，并为系统思维评估工具提供经验基础。第三阶段将以第一阶段和第二阶段的研究结果为基础。首先，使用与不同水平的系统思维能力相关的问题解决方法的经验基础分类，阶段3将开发和测试基于场景的书面评估工具。这个评估工具将区分不同级别的系统思考专家。第三阶段还将建立在对教育和生活经历如何与系统思维能力差异相关联的持续检查的基础上。

Engineers play an important role in addressing the complex problems of our global society, such as access to water and global health care. Employers, policy makers, and educators agree on the need for engineers who can identify and incorporate into their decision making relevant aspects of systems in which their work is embedded. To date, there is limited research to guide educators in fostering systems thinking, and few of these studies offer clear and comprehensive definitions that can be translated into teaching approaches and learning assessments. This project will develop and test a definition of systems thinking as a holistic approach to problem solving in which linkages and interactions of the engineering problem with its constituent parts, the larger sociocultural context, and potential impacts over time are identified and incorporated into decision making. In the field of engineering, research on systems thinking tends to emphasize the ability to recognize potentially relevant components of an engineering problem, rather than how these components are embedded in broader economic, sociocultural, and temporal contexts that must also inform decision making and solutions. Furthermore, elements of systems thinking, such as an awareness of a particular sociocultural context or the ability to coordinate work among members of a cross-disciplinary team, are not always recognized as core engineering skills. Considering these professional skills as lying outside the core of engineering can alienate individuals whose strengths and passions are related to, for example, engineering systems that consider and impact social change. A broader consideration of what constitutes engineering may be particularly relevant for women and racially/ethnically minoritized students who are more likely to be drawn to work where the social impact is relevant. This study examines systems thinking among diverse individuals across a range of expertise to develop a scenario-based assessment tool that educators and researchers can use to evaluate engineering students' systems thinking competence and can help broaden understandings of what is a core engineering skill. The primary aim of this study is to expand current conceptions of systems thinking within engineering. The project will define and assess systems thinking across a range of expertise and identify life, educational, and work experiences that contribute to this expertise. The study will consist of three phases. Phase 1 consists of interviews with engineering students and practitioners to understand individuals' concrete experiences with systems thinking, the approaches they have used to solve complex engineering problems, and the relationship of their prior life, educational, and work experiences with their systems thinking practice and skill. Phase 2 involves think-aloud interviews in which participants are presented with an open-ended engineering problem scenario and asked to discuss how they would explore a possible solution. This phase allows for the comparison of the strategies individuals with different levels of systems thinking skill employ as they are solving a problem and their rationales for decision making. This phase will yield an in-depth understanding of different levels of systems thinking ability and provide the empirical foundation for a systems thinking assessment tool. Phase 3 will build on findings from Phases 1 and 2. First, using the empirically grounded classification of the problem-solving approaches associated with different levels of systems thinking ability, Phase 3 will develop and test a scenario-based written assessment tool. This assessment tool will distinguish between levels of systems thinking expertise. Phase 3 will also build on the ongoing examination of how educational and life experiences may be associated with differences in systems thinking ability.