Abstract
This paper argues that fostering subjectivity in engineering education will aid engineers in understanding the connections between their own life values and motivations and their career choice and development. By fostering subjectivity in engineering education, we mean linking the person who studies with what they are studying, a definition that can be situated within the philosophy and methodology of Bernard Lonergan. This paper also presents evidence for pedagogical strategies to foster subjectivity based on our definition of subjectivity in engineering education. We analyze data collected during a pilot offering of a co-curricular course for engineering graduate students (the Lead by Design Institute) to determine to what extent the Lead by Design pedagogy fostered subjectivity. The paper concludes with reflections on implications for future engineering education, from the philosophical framework of Lonergan’s model of the human subject, and from our analysis of the Lead by Design pedagogy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
Space precludes a full review of the various philosophical perspectives on subjectivity and objectivity, and their evolution over time. Here we start with a generic philosophical definition of subjectivity (Hall 2004; Dusek 2006), then refine the definition from within the philosophical framework of Bernard Lonergan’s cognitional theory and model of the human subject (Lonergan 1992).
- 3.
With personal digital technologies such as smartphones, tablets and wearables, the entangled relationship of the engineer’s work with the complexity and subjectivity of human beings (the engineer included) is paralleled in a new way by the relationship of the user’s subjectivity and personal experience with her smart communicating device (Fritzsche 2018).
- 4.
- 5.
By the theory of reflective practice (Bolton 2010), spontaneous writing over a short period of time is a process that can elicit genuine insights. Thus, subjectivity is an element of reflective practice, one of the three threads of the Institute. The second thread was dialogue; subjectivity can be a key element of dialogue, when it is properly conducted (Bohm 1996). The third thread was leadership, defined to include self-awareness and self-leadership (Cohen and Cohen 2012). Thus, subjectivity was a potential element in all three threads of the Institute.
- 6.
All participant names are anonymized.
References
Badenhorst, C. M. (2007). Research writing: Breaking the barriers. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
Badenhorst, C. M., Moloney, C., & Rosales, J. (2016). New literacies for engineering students: critical reflective writing practice. Poster presented at EARLI SIG writing conference, Liverpool Hope University, Liverpool, UK, 4–5 July 2016.
Benton, J., Drage, A., & McShane, P. (2005). Introducing critical thinking. Vancouver: Axial Press.
Bohm, D. (1996). On dialogue. New York/London: Routledge.
Bolton, G. (2010). Reflective practice: Writing and professional development (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publications.
Canadian Engineering Leadership Forum. (2009). Leading a canadian future: The new engineer in society. Montreal Declaration, National Engineering Summit, Montreal, QC 21 May 2009. http://www.engineerscanada.ca/. Accessed 15 Jan 2017.
Catalano, G. (2011). Tragedy in the Gulf: A call for a new engineering ethic (Synthesis Lectures on Engineers, Technology and Society). San Rafael: Morgan and Claypool Publishers.
Cech, E. A. (2013). The (mis)framing of social justice: Why ideologies of depoliticization and meritocracy hinder engineers’ ability to think about social justices. In J. Lucena (Ed.), Engineering education for social justice: Critical explorations and opportunities (Philosophy of Engineering and Technology series, pp. 67–84). New York: Springer.
Cohen, C. M., & Cohen, S. L. (2012). Lab dynamics: Management and leadership skills for scientists (2nd ed.). Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor Press.
Conklin, J. (2005). Wicked problems and social complexity. CogNexus. http://www.cognexus.org. Accessed 15 Jan 2017. Also Chapter 1 in Conklin (2005). Dialogue mapping: Building shared understanding of wicked problems. Hoboken: Wiley.
Deo, B., & Strong, D. (2003). Fixing the problem of subjectivity in the concept of ‘activity’ in activity based costing (ABC) – An engineering perspective. In Proceedings of the IIE Annual Conference.
Dusek, V. (2006). Philosophy of technology: An introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Engineers Canada. (2016a). Reaching 30 by 30: Promising practices for increasing diversity and inclusion in engineering. http://www.engineerscanada.ca/. Accessed 10 Oct 2016.
Engineers Canada. (2016b). Welcoming workplaces: Diversity in the engineering profession. http://www.engineerscanada.ca/. Accessed 10 Oct 2016.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder.
Frezza, S. T., & Nordquest, D. A. (2015). Engineering insight: The philosophy of Bernard Lonergan applied to engineering. In R. Korte, M. Mina, I. Omidvar, S. T. Frezza, D. A. Nordquest, & A. Cheville (Eds.), Philosophical and educational perspectives on engineering and technological literacy, II. Wicklow: American Society of Engineering Education. http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ece_books/2. Accessed 10 Oct 2016.
Fritzsche, A. (2018). Dancing the device: A translational approach to technology. In J.C. Pitt & A. Shew (Eds.), Spaces for the future: A companion to philosophy of technology, pp. 216-223. New York: Routledge.
Goldberg, D. E., Somerville, M., & Whitney, C. (2014). A whole new engineer: The coming revolution in engineering education. Douglas: Three Joy Associates.
Goldman, S. L. (2004). Why we need a philosophy of engineering: A work in progress. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 29(2), 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1179/030801804225012572.
Grasso, D., & Burkins, M. B. (Eds.). (2010). Holistic engineering education: Beyond technology. New York: Springer.
Gunnlaugson, O., & Moore, J. (2009). Dialogue education in the post-secondary classroom: Reflecting on dialogue processes from two higher education settings in North America. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 33(2), 171–181.
Hall, D. E. (2004). Subjectivity. New York: Routledge.
Keller, E. F. (1985). Reflections on gender and science. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Korte, R. (2015). Pragmatism, practice and engineering. In R. Korte, M. Mina, I. Omidvar, S. T. Frezza, D. A. Nordquest, & A. Cheville (Eds.), Philosophical and educational perspectives on engineering and technological literacy, II. Wicklow: American Society of Engineering Education. http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ece_books/2. Accessed 10 Oct 2016.
Lonergan, B. J. F. (1973). Method in theology (2nd ed.). London: Dartman Longman and Todd.
Lonergan, B. J. F. (1985). A third collection. New York: Paulist Press.
Lonergan, B. J. F. (1992). In Collected Works of Bernard Lonergan, v.3, R. M. Doran & F. E. Crowe (Eds.), Insight: A study of human understanding. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Lönngren, J., & Svanström, M. (2016). Systems thinking for dealing with wicked sustainability problems: Beyond functionalist approaches. In W. Leal Filho & E. Nesbit (Eds.), New developments in engineering education for sustainable development (World Sustainability Series, pp. 199–212). Berlin: Springer. http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319329321
McLean, D. (2003). Workplaces that work: Creating a workplace culture that attracts, retains and promotes women, Canadian federal/provincial/territorial ministers responsible for the status of women.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Michelfelder, D. P., & Jones, S. A. (2016). From caring about sustainability to developing care-ful engineers. In W. Leal Filho & E. Nesbit (Eds.), New developments in engineering education for sustainable development (World Sustainability Series, pp. 173–184). Berlin: Springer. http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319329321
Moloney, C., & Rosales, J. (2011). The MetaKettle project: A journey to the heart of higher education. In Proceedings from 15th international conference of women in engineering and science, Adelaide, Australia, July 19–22. www.mun.ca/springinstitute/publications/MoloneyRosalesICWES15FinalMay27.pdf. Accessed 10 Oct 2016.
Moloney, C., Rosales, J., Badenhorst, C. & Roberts, J. (2016a). Fostering reflective practice for sustainable professional development: Lead by Design, a pedagogical initiative. In W. Leal Filho & E. Nesbit (Eds.), New developments in engineering education for sustainable development (World Sustainability Series, pp. 199–212). Berlin: Springer. http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319329321.
Moloney, C., Rosales, J., & Badenhorst, C. (2016b). A methodological evaluation of an integrative pedagogy for engineering education. In Proceedings of IEEE Frontiers in Education (FIE) 2016, Erie, PA, October 12–15, 2016.
Montano, G. (2008). A quantitative analysis of first-year engineering student persistence and interest in civic engagement at a Canadian university. M.Ed. thesis, Memorial University, 2008.
Montgomery, S. L. (1996). The scientific voice. New York: The Guildford Press.
Morelli, M. (2016). Self-possession: Being at home in conscious performance. Los Angeles: Encanto Editions.
National Academy of Engineering (NAE). (2005). Educating the engineer of 2020: Adapting engineering education to the new century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
National Academy of Engineering (NAE). (2008). NAE grand challenges of engineering. http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/cms/challenges.aspx. Accessed 10 Oct 2016.
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
Sheppard, S. D., Pellegrino, J. W., & Olds, B. M. (2008). On becoming a 21st century engineer (Guest editor’s forward). Journal of Engineering Education, July, Special Issue on Educating Future Engineers: Who, What, and How, 97(3), 231–234.
Simon, H. A. (1981). The sciences of the artificial (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Smith, L. C. (2010). The world in 2050: Four forces shaping civilization’s northern future. New York: Dutton.
Webb, E. (1988). Philosophers of consciousness. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Zajonc, A. (2016). Contemplation in education. In K. A. Schonert-Reichl & R. W. Roeser (Eds.), Handbook of mindfulness in education (pp. 17–28). New York: Springer.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by a grant from the Hebron Diversity Fund 2013-2014 and by an award in 2014 from the Quick Start Fund for Public Engagement (Memorial University). We acknowledge with thanks the participation of the Engineering graduate students in the Lead by Design Institute in April 2014, as well as the contributions of guest speakers and other supporters. Ethical approval of this research was granted by the Interdisciplinary Committee on Ethics in Human Research at Memorial University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Moloney, C., Badenhorst, C., Rosales, J. (2018). Fostering Subjectivity in Engineering Education: Philosophical Framework and Pedagogical Strategies. In: Fritzsche, A., Oks, S. (eds) The Future of Engineering. Philosophy of Engineering and Technology, vol 31. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91029-1_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91029-1_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-91028-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-91029-1
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)