| Summary: | Background: Much of the student activity in undergraduate programs is devoted to development of technical knowledge and skills; however, in practice engineering work is usually sociotechnical where the technical and social aspects are interrelated and mutually constitutive. Productive group practice, the socially negotiated and shared ways that individuals effectively interact, is critical to make progress on sociotechnical work. Purpose/Hypothesis: This illustrative case study characterizes changes in group practice during a realistic, open-ended project. Design/Method: Audio recordings and transcripts of a three-person group during two stages of the project were analyzed. The target group’s interactions were quantitatively characterized using longitudinal coding followed by discourse analysis with a focus on intonation. Findings: The group engaged in conceptual, material, and social aspects of engineering practice during both stages. During the earlier stage, one of the three members talked most; however, during the later stage, the talk became more distributed. Discourse analysis revealed a shift in the team members’ interactions from the controlling discourse of one group member to supportive discourse among all three members. Additionally, different forms of authority were used during the two stages to exert influence. This shift allowed unique roles and contributions of each group member to emerge. The interactions between the group and the instructor during a design meeting appear to have supported this shift. Conclusions: Findings suggest tangible ways for educators to change the nature and framing of classroom work to support more equitable group practice. Specifically, change occurs when group members shift from authority claims based on information from other authorities (e.g., the instructor, the literature, the course notes) to collaborative reasoning and sense-making. Elements of the task and the instructor framing that support equitable practice are described.
|
|---|