This paper reconceptualizes engineering literacy and the engineer’s role by examining the conceptual history of engineering. It begins from the question of how to frame meaningful engineering responses to public crises, situated in the authors’ own environmental engineering practice. It argues that this practice requires engineers who are literate in the historical ideas and contexts that have shaped accepted notions of the engineer’s role – i.e. what engineers do and what engineering is for. By employing the method of conceptual history, the paper critiques the standard approach to technological and engineering literacy for perpetuating an image of engineering as fabrication. It finds that this image positions engineering as a pre-political activity in a stable natural order. In other words, it conceptually constrains engineers’ agency and reflexivity concerning the aims and consequences of their work. Alternatively, the image of engineering arising from an embodied understanding – the engineer’s self-conception – is explored for its potential for affording agency and reflexivity. The paper finds that this latter image of engineering as action positions engineers as makers of their own image and capable of enacting transitions in engineering practice within a framework of public leadership. The paper concludes by proposing a reconceptualization of engineering literacy and the engineer’s role in the image of engineering as action. It argues that, without this step, even well-intentioned, change-oriented projects risk reproducing the limitations embedded in received notions of engineering literacy and the engineer’s role.
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4756-6952
University of New South Wales
[biography]
Are you a researcher? Would you like to cite this paper? Visit the ASEE document repository at peer.asee.org for more tools and easy citations.