Abstract
To design effective and socially sensitive systems, engineers must be able to integrate a technology-based approach to engineering problems with concerns for social impact and the context of use. The conventional approach to engineering education is largely technology-based, and even when additional courses with a social orientation are added, engineering graduates are often not well prepared to design user- and context-sensitive systems. Using data from interviews with three engineering students who had significant exposure to a socially-oriented perspective on production systems design, this paper argues that engineering students may have difficulty integrating in their own practice the technology-based and the socially-oriented perspectives on production. To enhance engineering students' ability to create systems that integrate both perspectives, and to relieve the intense cognitive and emotional pain that can be experienced by students exposed to both perspectives but unable to reconcile them, this paper reinforces the importance of teaching students the meta skill, design. A design perspective can help students integrate varied, sometimes conflicting, perspectives, and reach beyond customer-defined constraints to consider workplace and social impact.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Salzman, H. (1992) Skill-Based Design: Productivity, Learning, and Organizational Effectiveness. In: Adler, P.S. and Winograd, T.A. Usability: Turning Technologies into Tools. Oxford University Press, New York: 66–95.
Shaiken, H., Herzenberg, S., and Kuhn, S. (1986) The Work Process Under More Flexible Production. Industrial Relations 25:2, 167–183.
Bucciarelli, L.L. & Kuhn, S. (1997) Engineering Education and Engineering Practice: Improving the fit. In Barley, S.R. & Orr, J., eds. Between Craft and Science: Technical Work in U.S. Settings. ILR Press/Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York.
Winner, L. (1986) Do Artifacts Have Politics? In: Winner, L. The Whale and the Reactor. University of Chicago Press, Chicago: 19–39.
Kuhn, S. and Richardson, C. (1993) Standing on the Edge: Engineering Students Encounter Skill-Based Automation. In: Harvey, N. and Emspak, F., eds., Automated Systems Based on Human Skill and Intelligence. Pergamon Press: 19–26.
Howard, R. (1985) Brave New Workplace. Viking, New York.
Gal, S. (1996) Footholds for Design. In: Winograd, T.A., ed. Bringing Design to Software. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts: 215–227.
Klein, J. T. (1993) Blurring, Cracking, and Crossing: Permeation and the Fracturing of Discipline. In: Messer-Davidow, E., Shumway, D.R., & Sylvan, D.J., eds. Knowledges: Historical and Critical Studies in Disciplinarity. University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville.
Dogan, M. and Parhe, R. (1990) Creative Maginality: Innovation at the Intersections of Social Sciences. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.
Bucciarelli, L.L. (1994) Designing Engineers. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Davis, M. (1997) Better Communication Between Engineers and Managers: Some Ways to Prevent Many Ethically Hard Choices. Science and Engineering Ethics 3: 171–212.
Whitbeck, C. (1996) Ethics as Design: Doing Justice to Moral Problems. Hastings Center Report 26, no. 3: 9–16.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kuhn, S. When worlds collide: Engineering students encounter social aspects of production. SCI ENG ETHICS 4, 457–472 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-998-0039-5
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-998-0039-5