How Engineers Negotiate Domain Boundaries in a Complex, Interdisciplinary Engineering Project

Engineering educators have an essential role in preparing engineers to work in a complex, interdisciplinary workforce. While much engineering education focuses on teaching students to develop disciplinary expertise in specific engineering domains, there is a strong need to teach engineers about the knowledge that they develop or use in their work (Bucciarelli 1994, Allenby Sarewitz, 2011; Frodeman, 2013). The purpose of this research is to gain a better understanding of the knowledge systems of practicing engineers through observations of their practices such that the insights learned can guide future education efforts. Using an example from a complex and interdisciplinary engineering project, this paper presents a case study overviewing the types of epistemological (or knowledge-acquiring or using) complexities that engineers navigate. Specifically, we looked at a discussion of the thermal design of a CubeSat that occurred during an engineering review at NASA. We analyzed the review using a framework that we call 'peak events', or pointed discussions between reviewers, project engineers, and managers. We examined the dialog within peak events to identify the ways that knowledge was brought to bear, highlighting discussions of uncertainty and the boundaries of knowledge claims. We focus on one example discussion surrounding the thermal design of the CubeSat, which provides a particularly thorough example of a knowledge system since the engineers present explained, justified, negotiated, and defended knowledge within a social setting. Engineering students do not get much practice or instruction in explicitly negotiating knowledge systems and epistemic standards in this way. We highlight issues that should matter to engineering educators, such as the need to discuss what level of uncertainty is sufficient and the need to negotiate boundaries of system responsibility. Although this analysis is limited to a single discussion or 'peak event', our case shows that this type of discussion can occur in engineering and suggests that it could be important for future engineering education research.