Addressing Engineers and Stakeholders Social and Institutional Power in an Human-Centered Design Capstone Course

Corey T Schimpf; Jessica E S Swenson; Courtney Burris

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Baltimore , Maryland
Publication Date: June 25, 2023
Start Date: June 25, 2023
End Date: June 28, 2023
Conference Session: Interdisciplinary Integration at the Course Level
Tagged Division: Liberal Education/Engineering & Society Division (LEES)
Tagged Topic: Diversity
Page Count: 20
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--42574
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/42574
Download Count: 192

Paper Authors

biography

Corey T Schimpf University at Buffalo, The State University of New York orcid.org/0000-0003-2706-3282

visit author page

Corey Schimpf is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at the University at Buffalo, SUNY. His lab focuses on engineering design, advancing research methods, and technology innovations to support learning in complex domains. Major research strands include: (1) analyzing how expertise develops in engineering design across the continuum from novice pre-college students to practicing engineers, (2) advancing engineering design research by integrating new theoretical or analytical frameworks (e.g., from data science or complexity science) and (3) conducting design-based research to develop scaffolding tools for supporting the learning of complex skills like design. He is the
Division Chair Elect for the Design in Engineering Education Division for the 2023 ASEE conference.

visit author page

biography

Jessica E S Swenson University at Buffalo, The State University of New York

visit author page

Jessica Swenson is an Assistant Professor at the University at Buffalo. She was awarded her doctorate and masters from Tufts University in mechanical engineering and STEM education respectively, and completed postdoctoral work at the University of Michigan. Her current research involves examining different types of homework problems in undergraduate engineering science courses, the intersection of affect and engineering identity, and improving the teaching of engineering courses.

visit author page

author page

Courtney Burris

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

As trained professionals, engineers have well recognized areas of expertise. Such expertise often translates into expert power in their professional practice. Expert power can be defined as the ability to influence other people, decision-making, and project planning and/or project outcomes. Moreover, engineers typically work with a wide variety of stakeholders that have differing levels of social or institutional power and often conflicting views (e.g., business leaders, community members, policy makers). This adds another layer of power dynamics engineers must navigate. In preparing students for professional contexts, there are increasing calls to develop human-centered design skills and perspectives that have the potential to take into consideration designers' social power and the institutional power they face, and seek a deeper integration of the views of stakeholders. However, the social and institutional power engineers must navigate has received little explicit attention in engineering education. This work attempts to better integrate theories of power from sociology and related areas into a senior capstone course.

Three major pedagogical strategies were used to incorporate the topic of power into the course. First, we draw on the work of British Sociologists Steven Lukes (1974) and his three faces of power framework (i.e. power over decision making, turning topics into non-decisions, and setting an ideological agenda). Students read Lukes, and had a class discussion. The instructors translated each of these “faces” of power into engineering design scenarios and had students discuss how they would respond to each. Second, a case study focused on the engineering failures that magnified the tragedy of Hurricane Katrina. Two readings covered: (1) the culmination of many decisions that led to segregation and inequity in New Orleans, and (2) the engineering failures of the levy system which left historically black neighborhoods at risk. Class discussion began by acknowledging the sensitivity of these topics. The discussion focused on the convergence of the articles. This topic relates to power imbalances in both political institutions and engineering decisions. Third, we asked students to select a scenario either local to the university or their hometowns that centered on public health concerns related to infrastructure or industry. Scenarios selected included historical sites, such as the Love Canal, to modern issues, such as the Buffalo Bills new stadium. Other problems included lead water pipes in their highschool. We asked students to identify all potential stakeholders for their problem and select three stakeholders to analyze their power to address the problem. Lastly, the students provided solution suggestions that addressed stakeholders concerns and differences in power.

After presenting the strategies, the three instructors share their reflections on successes and challenges of integrating discussions of power into students' professional training. We will draw out several implications including: 1) possible avenues for greater integration of the topic into capstone classes and potential transferability to other engineering classes; 2) how the topic of power relates to issues of equity, privilege, and empathy with stakeholders or users; 3) how power affects interactions with peers on teams and in the class more broadly.

Citation
Format

Schimpf, C. T., & Swenson, J. E. S., & Burris, C. (2023, June), Addressing Engineers and Stakeholders Social and Institutional Power in an Human-Centered Design Capstone Course Paper presented at 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Baltimore , Maryland. 10.18260/1-2--42574

TY - CPAPER
AB - As trained professionals, engineers have well recognized areas of expertise. Such expertise often translates into expert power in their professional practice. Expert power can be defined as the ability to influence other people, decision-making, and project planning and/or project outcomes. Moreover, engineers typically work with a wide variety of stakeholders that have differing levels of social or institutional power and often conflicting views (e.g., business leaders, community members, policy makers). This adds another layer of power dynamics engineers must navigate. In preparing students for professional contexts, there are increasing calls to develop human-centered design skills and perspectives that have the potential to take into consideration designers&#39; social power and the institutional power they face, and seek a deeper integration of the views of stakeholders. However, the social and institutional power engineers must navigate has received little explicit attention in engineering education. This work attempts to better integrate theories of power from sociology and related areas into a senior capstone course.

Three major pedagogical strategies were used to incorporate the topic of power into the course. First, we draw on the work of British Sociologists Steven Lukes (1974) and his three faces of power framework (i.e. power over decision making, turning topics into non-decisions, and setting an ideological agenda). Students read Lukes, and had a class discussion. The instructors translated each of these “faces” of power into engineering design scenarios and had students discuss how they would respond to each. Second, a case study focused on the engineering failures that magnified the tragedy of Hurricane Katrina. Two readings covered: (1) the culmination of many decisions that led to segregation and inequity in New Orleans, and (2) the engineering failures of the levy system which left historically black neighborhoods at risk. Class discussion began by acknowledging the sensitivity of these topics. The discussion focused on the convergence of the articles. This topic relates to power imbalances in both political institutions and engineering decisions. Third, we asked students to select a scenario either local to the university or their hometowns that centered on public health concerns related to infrastructure or industry. Scenarios selected included historical sites, such as the Love Canal, to modern issues, such as the Buffalo Bills new stadium. Other problems included lead water pipes in their highschool. We asked students to identify all potential stakeholders for their problem and select three stakeholders to analyze their power to address the problem. Lastly, the students provided solution suggestions that addressed stakeholders concerns and differences in power.

After presenting the strategies, the three instructors share their reflections on successes and challenges of integrating discussions of power into students&#39; professional training. We will draw out several implications including: 1) possible avenues for greater integration of the topic into capstone classes and potential transferability to other engineering classes; 2) how the topic of power relates to issues of equity, privilege, and empathy with stakeholders or users; 3) how power affects interactions with peers on teams and in the class more broadly.

AU - Corey T Schimpf
AU - Jessica E S Swenson
AU - Courtney Burris
CY - Baltimore , Maryland
DA - 2023/06/25
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - Addressing Engineers and Stakeholders Social and Institutional Power in an Human-Centered Design Capstone Course
UR - https://peer.asee.org/42574
DO - 10.18260/1-2--42574
ER -