Engineers' Imaginaries of "the Public": Content Analysis of Foundational Professional Documents

Abstract

This paper presents results from a content analysis of foundational engineering documents with respect to characterizations of the relationship between engineering and "the public." Fourteen documents were reviewed, including National Academy of Engineering (NAE) reports, ABET accreditation criteria, disciplinary "Bodies of Knowledge," engineering codes of ethics, and organizational/programmatic brochures of leading entities in Learning Through Service (LTS). These documents were selected as repositories of the engineering profession's identity, vision, ambition, and perceived relationship with society. The purpose of the analysis was to identify manifest and latent messages about the engineering profession's institutionally sanctioned imaginaries of "the public."Guided by a theoretical framework of social imaginaries, three reviewers used qualitative data analysis to identify prevalent themes in how the engineering profession tends to conceptualize "the public." Ninety-nine codes were developed and were broadly divided into six themes: characterizations of "the public," professional duties related to "the public," relationship between engineers and "the public," societal problems in need of engineering solutions, engineers' "social footprint" over time, and vision or mission statements. The most prevalent theme identified overall characterized engineers as benefitting "the public." That engineers "solve problems," and the importance of building or sustaining engineers' professional image in the eye of "the public," were also commonly discussed. Predominant characterizations of "the public" were as members of "developing" countries (e.g., economically, technologically, in terms of industrial capacity and/or sustainable engagement with the environment) and as "lacking information" (e.g., about engineers or what engineers do).These results are part of a larger study about engineers' imaginaries of "the public" and how these imaginaries might influence the ways engineers see themselves and approach their work, the problems they attempt to solve, and the diverse publics they aim to serve. By examining dominant messages in these documents, as well as noticing absent messages, we can begin to understand the ideologies that inform the critical but often elusive boundary that engineers raise between their profession and society. As such, our analysis constitutes a first step toward deeper insight into how the engineering profession's identity vis-à-vis "the public" might enhance or weaken engineering practice and, ultimately, how it might support or undermine the profession's aspiration to promote the social good.

Professional Social Responsibility in Engineering

“…Vesilind [9] notes that there may be instances when these three elements differ, both in fact and among the perceptions of various groups within the public. Further, the public should not be viewed as a monolith, but rather engineers need to be aware of "diverse publics" with different needs and goals [10,11].…”

Representations of 'The Public' in Learning Through Service (LTS) Versus 'Mainstream' Engineering Foundational Professional Documents

“…Table 1 below details the names of these documents and justification for their selection. An earlier paper provides information on the number of pages reviewed per document, the number of distinct codes used per document, and density of coding (i.e., total number of coded segments and codes assigned to each segment) 3 [ Table 1]. A critical document for how a leading organization in the development and implementation of LTS sees its role in the interaction between engineers and traditionally marginalized communities.…”

“…This three-tiered coding approach was used to instill confidence in the code application, given the varying degrees of experience between the three reviewers and the significant volume of coding involved (929 pages and over 4600 individual codes applied to document segments). For a more detailed explanation of the coding process, see 3 .…”

“…The second and third most prevalent codes were that engineers solve problems and that they must "benefit or improve engineering" by building or sustaining their profession's public image 3 . Dominant characterizations of "the public," were as members of "developing" countries and as "lacking information" about what engineering is and engineers do.…”

“…Namely, that the engineering profession's identity vis-à-vis "the public" may systematically silence public voices, and thus at times undermine the profession's aspiration to promote the social good in ways that diverseand especially marginalizedpublics experience, recognize, and celebrate as promotions of the social good. By extension, this identity might compromise the profession's capacity to secure "the public's" trust in engineers as professionals who can be relied on to, indeed, make the world "a better place" 3 [p. 26].…”