| Summary: | <p>The design of medical instrumentation is a vital aspect of Biomedical Engineering (BME) programs. Yet, no full-length study analyzing the consequence of pedagogical methods on a medical device’s final design has been conducted. Being that these technologies are created with a specific end-use in mind, an examination of instructional design is essential for ascertaining how the user has come to be understood by those drafting solutions on their behalf. As such, this thesis examines the ways that biomedical engineering programs conceptualize user experience through design instruction. It navigates essentialist questions like who is a user and evolves to investigate the theoretical crux of medical device making to ask why decisions are made and what apparatuses might inform these choices. Through this process, it discerns a lack of critical pedagogy in BME design curricula, and thus argues that biomedical engineering programs must take seriously the ideas of race, gender, and other social categories in the teaching of medical device design.</p>
<p>This work begins by reflecting on the socio-historical relevance of medical devices. In doing so, it outlines health, education, and illness as value-laden, multi-dimensional notions that are often singularized. This piece contends that such singularization limits the reach and effectiveness of design instruction, reifying the belief that science is distinct from social meaning. It then reflects on the use of technology in the development of medical devices. Here, it offers a generational description of mechanical Computer Aided-Design (CAD)—a band of software used to transform 2D sketches into 3D digital models. Finally, through a series of semi-structured interviews with six recent graduates of two top ranked BME programs, this work develops the concept of exclusion as enactment to describe the catastrophic impacts exclusion can have for those underrepresented in currently utilized instructional frameworks.</p>
|
|---|