Chapter 3 Engineering as Performance: An “Experiential Gestalt” for Understanding Engineering

  Part I Reflections on Practice

Abstract

The study of engineering practice is increasing, revealing key aspects of the profession. Traditional analysis tends to wrongly separate engineering into scientific and non-scientific, or technical and social categories. This paper suggests viewing engineering as a performance, shifting attention from defining the essence of engineering activities to their execution and results. This perspective allows for a more holistic understanding of engineering work, recognizing it as a blend of scientific and non-scientific elements, as well as technical and social components.

3.1 Introduction

Interest in engineering practice is aimed at understanding its fundamental nature and the beliefs, values, and knowledge that underpin it. This understanding is thought to improve engineering education methods, such as project-based learning or the CDIO approach. The National Academy of Engineering also sees this understanding as a way to attract a diverse group of young people to the field, provide a more accurate public perspective of engineering, and foster an informed public engagement with the engineering profession.

3.2 Engineering Practice: A Dichotomous View

Attempts to define engineering practice have historically adopted a dichotomous perspective, separating intellectual and technical mastery from practical wisdom or skill. This view suggests that engineering involves exclusive knowledge, dynamic and specialized, and requires constant learning. Conversely, practical wisdom encompasses common skills that are static and can be learned once.

This dichotomy can misrepresent what engineering truly entails since it does not recognize that engineering language and communication, like other engineering activities, are both technical and social. Such a binary perspective may also perpetuate stereotypes that deter diverse groups from pursuing engineering careers and do not adequately reflect the collaborative and complex nature of engineering tasks.

The dichotomy could also imply that the rapidly evolving nature of technical competence in engineering might outpace educational responses, suggesting that a focus on technical competence alone is inadequate for preparing quality engineers. Rather, it's argued that engineering should combine technical and non-technical knowledge.

In summary, the dichotomous view, which prioritizes either the technical or the social aspect of engineering, is criticized as being too abstract and removed from the actual practice of engineering. The paper proposes viewing engineering as a "performance" to move beyond this binary and better capture the essence of engineering practice and education. It likens the identity and practice of engineering to a series of performative acts, suggesting a broader, more holistic approach to understanding and teaching engineering.

3.3 Performance: “An Essentially Contested Concept”

The concept of performance in various disciplines is complex and can be overwhelming due to its diverse interpretations and specialized vocabularies. Performance in the context of engineering is understood as action (doing), repeated action (re-doing), and demonstrative action (showing doing). It involves someone actively engaging in tasks for a specific purpose. This can range from the clearly defined, prepared, and audience-witnessed (aesthetically marked) to the everyday, routine activities (aesthetically neutral).

Performance also implies historical continuity, as no act is entirely new but is based on past actions, thus allowing for both adherence to and variation from established patterns. Moreover, performance is not just about the act itself, but also about demonstrating an awareness of that action, its history, and the actor’s identity as a performer.

This concept challenges the common misconception that performance is merely for show, emphasizing that it is purposeful, intentional work. In the realm of engineering, it suggests that the practice is a dynamic blend of doing, repeating, and showcasing work, which is crucial for understanding and advancing the profession.

3.4 Engineering as Performance and Communication

Communication in engineering is much more than just transferring information; it's a set of actions foundational to the professional performance of an engineer. Engineering communication involves action, situated in specific contexts and learned through participation. It is performative, encompassing doing, re-doing, and showing doing. This genre-based perspective on communication considers it a critical part of engineering work, guiding engineers in the effective execution of their roles.

Genres, or types of communicative actions, have histories and conventions that shape how communication is done in engineering contexts. Recognizing these genres helps engineers understand the work, adapt to new situations, and see their roles as dynamic. Communication is not merely technical or social; it's an action that is both integral to and constitutive of engineering work.

Understanding communication in this way broadens the view of engineering, placing technical aspects and non-technical aspects like ethics, aesthetics, politics, and culture on equal footing as essential components of the engineering profession.

3.5 Engineering as Performance: An Experiential Gestalt

Lakoff and Johnson argue that metaphors are more than linguistic expressions; they structure our experiences and understanding of reality. While both 'practice' and 'performance' as metaphors highlight the activities of engineers, 'practice' emphasizes the essential, often technical aspects of engineering, possibly neglecting the broader, human aspects of the profession.

In contrast, 'performance' views engineering as an inclusive ensemble of actions—doing, re-doing, and showing doing—that covers both technical and non-technical aspects, like communication and ethics. This view doesn’t isolate engineering to a stable identity but sees it as continuously shaped by a variety of acts.

'Performance' as a metaphor moves the focus from trying to define the essence of engineering to understanding the "performative accomplishment" of engineers—how they act and interact to make a difference in the world. This metaphor allows for a more dynamic and holistic understanding of the engineering profession.