1

Knowledge Basis

for DesignSteve Frezza, Ph. D., C.S.D.P.

Designing the Engineer

Motivation:

What makes engineering education Engineering…

2

How they know it…What engineers know…What makes engineering knowing different…

Not that different, form of Common-Sense KnowledgeDifferent from Scientific knowingYet different – Informed, Pragmatic

Usefulness as ValueEpistemological lensSuggests a set of defining values Pragmatic use

‘Pragmatic’ always located in a contextProblem/solution contextSolvers’ context

3

Problem/Solution ContextEach problem/solution context may be uniqueIncludes:

Social as well as domain-specific patterns Problem-specific knowledge Knowledge brought to, discovered or synthesized

Exploring the problem context is part of the engineering activity ??

Not emphasized in the rationalist approach

4

Solvers’ ContextEpistemological lens the engineers bring to problems

and solutions

IncludesHistorical, scientific and artistic roots of modern

engineering practice, Embodied in the knowledge expected of current engineers

Engineering heuristics and patterns specific to sub-domains of engineering E.g., electrical, mechanical, environmental, civil, software,

etc.

5

Design Considerations

Engineering activity: DesignActivity and work productAimed at sufficiently satisfactory solution(s)

vs. single, optimal solution

Social, human activityCharacterized by language and goal negotiation

Creative, constructive knowledge & skillRationalist, empiricist, other?

6

7

Thinking about …engineering design thinking

Key question:Is engineering design knowing somehow different from other types of knowing?

Scientific knowingArtistic knowing

Engineering Design Knowing DiffersEngineering Design Knowing Differs

Use in soln over explanation Use in soln over explanation External value over internalExternal value over internal

8

Thinking about …engineering design thinking

Key questions:In engineering design, what do we know, and how do we know it?

Math and science: Approximating RealityPractical reasoning: ConversationConstructing solutions: Puzzle making and puzzle solvingValue claims: Usefulness

Engineering Design Knowing Engineering Design Knowing Similar, but differentSimilar, but different

Approximating Reality Engineering Design as a goal-oriented activity:

Identify & solve contextually-located problem(s)Reality: Subjective and objective

Science and Math: Means to an endTheoretical Knowing, statistical knowing

Rationalist Approach: Math and science as foundational analytical methods; overemphasis

on objective reality

9

Practical Design ReasoningReasoning that terminates in an action Core metric: ‘satisfactoriness,’

Selecting course of action; satisfactory way to fulfill a needAction to explore requirements, advance designs, evaluate

sufficiency of product or the process

A set of developing arguments In the mind of the designerAmong collaborating designersAmong the members of a design teamAmong designers and stakeholders

10

Practical Design ReasoningDesigner(s) identify the relevant details

From the surrounding context Weave it into a plan to satisfactorily achieves the sought-for

good

Activities and artifacts act as warrants and reasonsBuild the case for the solution, sought-for goodEstablish a value claim with respect to the problem(s)

identifiedExamine details of the problem/solution fragments Requires a certain reasoning skill

11

Constructing Distinctly Engineering Designs

Puzzle making and puzzle solvingRequire a satisfactory response

ongoing series of satisfactory responses‘wicked’–no definitive formulation;

Solutions emergeA function of how the problem is described Must be compared, judgment over relative “goodness”Criteria of goodness negotiated

12

Constructing DesignsConstructed artifacts and conversations

Part of the design process

Multi-purpose: constructed artifacts serve as Sub-goals for the knowledge-generating activitiesEvidence of what has been learned, accepted, Evidence of what remains to be assessed for its validity or

‘goodness’

13

14

Values and Value ClaimsCentral value: Justified reasoningUse of math and science

Means to an end; Approximation of reality

Application of practical reasoningReasoning for action; satisfactoriness

Domain-specific means of constructing solutionsTraditional engineering content

Establishing and validating value claimsEconomics, trade-offs, pitches, refinement

Implications for PedagogyShift the focus of engineering education

from applied technical or scientific knowledge to practical reasoning and solution making & solving

Distinguishing engineering design education…Foundations in reasoningSocial patterns of designPatterns for exploring problem/solution contextsDesign Reasoning

15

Teach Design ReasoningDesign Reasoning…

To support actionUses ‘satisfactoriness’ as its central metricUnder incomplete knowledgeWhere details are essentialIn situations where the relevance of details is not clear or

obvious

16

Core Engineering Design

Education that emphasizes Puzzle making and puzzle solvingRisk and Failure Identification of the user perspectiveSocial context of design

17

Core Engineering Design

Education emphasizing the wicked Solution making that:Emerge as a function of how the ‘problem’ is described… Lack clear-cut criteria for determining if the problem has been satisfactorily solved… Are about better or worse, not right or wrong… Whose costs and risks only allow for one attempt…

18