Characteristics of Successful Cross‐disciplinary Engineering Education Collaborations

This article employs theory to demonstrate the characteristics of successful cross-disciplinary engineering education collaborations. Specifically, we analyzed data from interviews with 24 recent Journal of Engineering Education authors from engineer-nonengineer teams. Theoretical frameworks from education and psychology are used to ground the results and contribute to broader research on collaboration across technology and social science disciplines. The data suggest that the way an individual understands and appreciates the nature of knowledge affects the way he or she collaborates with colleagues in different academic disciplines, especially when the disciplines are fundamentally different. Although the literature criticizes engineers for not understanding or respecting other viewpoints, we found that nine engineers and eight nonengineers articulated awareness of their collaborators' perspectives, worked to integrate these into the research, and noted increased satisfaction and quality of work as a result. Recommendations for fostering this type of interdisciplinary integration in engineering education are offered along with suggestions for future research.

[1]  B. Tuckman.  DEVELOPMENTAL SEQUENCE IN SMALL GROUPS. , 1965, Psychological bulletin.

[2]  V. Anfara,et al.  Qualitative Analysis on Stage: Making the Research Process More Public , 2002 .

[3]  T. Honderich.  The Oxford Companion to Philosophy , 1995 .

[4]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research : techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory , 1998 .

[5]  Roland Fivaz.  Why consciousness? A causal account , 2000 .

[6]  Lisa R. Lattuca,et al.  Does Interdisciplinarity Promote Learning? Theoretical Support and Researchable Questions , 2004 .

[7]  M. Borrego,et al.  Discipline-Based Views of Collaboration in Engineering Education Research Partnerships , 2006, Proceedings. Frontiers in Education. 36th Annual Conference.

[8]  Walter P. Vispoel,et al.  Knowledge Acquisition for Application: Cognitive Flexibility and Transfer in Complex Content Domains. Technical Report No. 409. , 1987 .

[9]  James R. Davis.  Interdisciplinary Courses and Team Teaching: New Arrangements for Learning , 1995 .

[10]  Robin Adams,et al.  Becoming an Engineering Education Researcher: Finding Pathways toward Interdisciplinarity. Research Brief. , 2007 .

[11]  D. Nathanael,et al.  Cognitive engineering practice: melting theory into reality , 2005 .

[12]  Janice Beyer Lodahl,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Fields and the Functioning of University Graduate Departments. , 1972 .

[13]  M. Patton.  Qualitative research & evaluation methods , 2002 .

[14]  Elizabeth G. Creamer,et al.  Gender and Disciplinary Differences in Experiences with Interdisciplinary Collaboration , 2007 .

[15]  Howard Gardner,et al.  Assessing Interdisciplinary Work at the Frontier: An Empirical Exploration of "Symptoms of Quality" , 2003 .

[16]  J. Klein,et al.  Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory, and Practice. , 1991 .

[17]  Maura Borrego,et al.  Development of Engineering Education as a Rigorous Discipline: A Study of the Publication Patterns of Four Coalitions , 2007 .

[18]  Lisa D. Bendixen,et al.  Domain-Generality and Domain-Specificity in Personal Epistemology Research: Philosophical and Empirical Reflections in the Development of a Theoretical Framework , 2006 .

[19]  A. Biglan.  The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas. , 1973 .

[20]  K. Tonso.  The Impact of Cultural Norms on Women , 1996 .