Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tzmfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-06T17:24:17.290Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 3 - Situative Frameworks for Engineering Learning Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2015

By
Aditya Johri ,
Barbara M. Olds  and
Kevin O’Connor
Edited by
Aditya Johri  and
Barbara M. Olds
Aditya Johri
Affiliation:
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Barbara M. Olds
Affiliation:
Colorado School of Mines
Kevin O’Connor
Affiliation:
University of Colorado
Aditya Johri
Affiliation:
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Barbara M. Olds
Affiliation:
Colorado School of Mines
Get access

Summary

Introduction

There is increased concern with developing a better understanding of how people learn engineering, as prior efforts to improve engineering education have often followed an ad hoc trajectory. The field lacks a systematic understanding of how engineering learning occurs and there is a paucity of knowledge on which to draw (Felder, Sheppard, & Smith, 2005; Chapter 1 by Froyd & Lohmann, this volume). To help redress this situation, in this chapter we review scholarship on learning with the aim of building a framework that can guide future research on engineering learning. Specifically, we hope to make the case for a framework that focuses on situativity and learning in engineering settings. This chapter complements other chapters in this volume including Chapters 2 by Newstetter and Svinicki; 4 by Roth; and 5 by Streveler, Brown, Herman, and Monfort that also focus on learning.

An Introduction to Learning

During the past couple of centuries, scholars from a wide range of disciplines including philosophy, psychology, anthropology, and sociology have spent considerable time trying to answer questions related to learning, such as: How does cognitive development take place? How do we grow from a child with rudimentary abilities and knowledge into a highly skillful adult? How are humans able to engage in highly complex activities? Some scholars whose work has had a major influence on research on learning include Lev Vygotsky (1962, 1978), Jean Piaget (1952, 1964), John Dewey (1896, 1934), Harold Garfinkel (1967), William James (1890/1950), George Herbert Mead (1934), Gregory Bateson (1978), Michel Polanyi (1967), and Jerome Bruner (1990, 1960). Core ideas of these scholars adopted by learning researchers in their intelle-ctual and methodological trajectory include Vygotsky's cultural historical theory, Piaget's genetic epistemology, Dewey's transactional account, James's pragmatism and realism, Polanyi's tacit knowledge, and Garfinkel's ethnomethodology. These ideas have not only shaped theoretical development of the field of learning but have also influenced the design of learning environments including our schools and curricula. Many central ideas that we take for granted in educational practice, such as the progression of child development through specific stages and the value of group work and collaborative learning, can be traced back to these influential scholars.

Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research , pp. 47 - 66
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

ABET (2011). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs – Program outcomes and assessment. Baltimore, MD: Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. R., Greeno, J. G., Reder, L. M., & Simon, H. A. (2000). Perspectives on learning, thinking, and activity. Educational Researcher, 29, 11–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. R., Reder, L., & Simon, H. A. (1996). Situated learning and education. Educational Researcher, 25, 5–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. R., Reder, L., & Simon, H. A. (1997). Situative and cognitive perspectives: Form versus substance. Educational Researcher, 26, 18– 21.Google Scholar
Barab, S. A., & Duffy, T. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. In Jonassen, D. & Land, S. M. (Eds.),Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 25–56). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bateson, G. (1978). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York, NY: Ballantine.Google Scholar
Becker, H. S. (1972). A school is a lousy place to learn anything in. American Behavioral Scientist, 16, 85–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1989). Intentional learning as a goal of instruction. In Resnick, L. B. (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 361–392). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
Bransford, J. (2007). Preparing people for rapidly changing environments. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(1), 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (expanded edition). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. In Iran-Nejad, A. & Pearson, P. D. (Eds.), Review of research in education (Vol. 24, pp. 61–100). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bruner, J. S. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bucciarelli, L. L. (1994). Designing engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clancey, W. J. (1997). Situated cognition: On human knowledge and computer representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clancey, W. J. (2009). Scientific antecedents of situated cognition. In Robbins, P. & Aydede, M. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of situated cognition (pp. 11–34). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Cole, M., Engeström, Y., & Vasquez, O (1997). Introduction. In Cole, M., Engeström, Y., & Vasquez, O. (Eds.), Mind, culture and activity (pp. 1–21). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Danish, J., & Enyedy, N. (2006). Unpacking the mediation of invented representations. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on the Learning Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN (pp. 113–119).Google Scholar
Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience. New York, NY: Minton, Balch.Google Scholar
Dewey, J. (1896). The reflex arc concept in psychology. Psychological Review, 3(4), 357–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donaldson, M. (1978). Children's minds. Glasgow: Fontana.Google Scholar
Dourish, P. (2001). Where the action is: The foundations of embodied interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Duranti, A., & Goodwin, C. (1992). Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dym, C. L., Agogino, A. M., Eris, O., Frey, D. D., & Leifer, L. J. (2005). Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckert, P. (1989). Jocks and burnouts: Social categories and identity in the high school. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Eisenhart, M. A. (2011, April). “We can't get there from here:” The meaning and context of girls’ engagement with STEM. Division G invited lecture, American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Eisenhart, M. A., & Finkel, E. (1998). Women's science: Learning and succeeding from the margins. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit Oy.Google Scholar
Engestrom, Y., & Cole, M. (1997). Situated cognition in search of an agenda. In Kirshner, D. & Whitson, J. A. (Eds.), Situated cognition: Social, semiotic, and psychological perspectives (pp. 301– 309). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Engle, R. A. (2006). Framing interactions to foster generative learning: A situative explanation of transfer in a community of learners classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(4), 451–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felder, R. M., Shepard, S. D., & Smith, K. A. (2005). A new journal for a field in transition. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 7–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foor, C. E., Walden, S. E., & Trytten, D. A. (2007). “I wish that I belonged more in this whole engineering group:” Achieving individual diversity. Journal of Engineering Education, 96, 103–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Gee, J. P. (1992). The social mind: Language, ideology and social practice. New York, NY: Bergen and Garvey.Google Scholar
Gee, J. P. (1997). Thinking, learning and reading: The situated sociocultural mind. In Kirshner, D. & Whitson, J. A. (Eds.), Situated cognition: Social, semiotic and psychological perspectives (pp. 37–55). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gee, J. P. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York, NY: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Gill, J., Sharp, R., Mills, J., & Franzway, S. (2008). I still wanna be an engineer! Women, education and the engineering profession. European Journal of Engineering Education, 33(4), 391–402.CrossRef
Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96, 606–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 1489–1522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greeno, J. (2006). Learning in activity. In Sawyer, K. (Ed). Cambridge handbook of learning sciences (pp. 79–96). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Greeno, J. G. (1989). A perspective on thinking. American Psychologist, 44(2), 134–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greeno, J. G. & The Middle School Mathematics Through Applications Project Group (1997). Theories and practices of thinking and learning to think. American Journal of Education, 106, 85–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greeno, J., Collins, A., & Resnick, L. (1996). Cognition and learning. In Calfee, R. & Berliner, D. (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 15–46). New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Greeno, J., & Hall, R. (1997). Practicing representation learning with and about representational forms. Phi Delta Kappa, 78(5), 361–367.Google Scholar
Greeno, J., & van de Sande, C. (2007). Perspectival understanding of conceptions and conceptual growth in interaction. Educational Psychologist, 42(1), 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greeno, J. G. (1997). On claims that answer the wrong question. Educational Researcher, 26(1), 5–17.Google Scholar
Haghigi, K. (2005, October). Quiet no longer: Birth of a new discipline. Journal of Engineering Education, 351–353.
Hall, R. (1996). Representation as shared activity: Situated cognition and Dewey's Cartography of Experience. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(3), 209–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, R., & Stevens, R. (1995). Making space: A comparison of mathematical work at school and in professional design practice. In Star, S. L. (Ed.), Cultures of computing (pp. 118–145). London: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Harris, T. R., Bransford, J. D., & Brophy, S. P. (2002). Roles for learning sciences and learning technologies in biomedical engineering education: A review of recent advances. Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering, 4, 29–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hodges, D. C. (1998). Participation as dis-identification with/in a community of practice. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5, 272–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hurtado, A. (1996). The color of privilege: Three blasphemies on race and feminism. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Hutchins, E. (1993). Learning to navigate. In Chaiklin, S. & Lave, J. (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 35–63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
James, W. (1890/1950). The principles of psychology, Vols. I and II. New York, NY: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
Johri, A. (2010, July). Guest editorial: Creating theoretical insights in engineering Education. Journal of Engineering Education, 183–184.
Johri, A. (2011). Sociomaterial Bricolage: The creation of location-spanning work practices by global software developers. Information and Software Technology, 53(9), 955–968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johri, A., & Lohani, V. (2011). A framework for improving engineering representational literacy through the use of pen-based computing. International Journal of Engineering Education, 27(5), 958–967.Google Scholar
Kirshner, D., & Whitson, J. A. (1997). Introduction. In Kirshner, D. & Whitson, J. A. (Eds.), Situated cognition: Social, semiotic, and psychological perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Kirshner, D., & Whitson, J. A. (1998). Obstacles to understanding cognition as situated. Educational Researcher, 27, 22–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1999). Pandora's hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lave, J. (1991). Situated learning in communities of practice. In Resnick, L. B., Levine, J. M., & Teasley, S. D. (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 63–82). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lave, J. (1993). The practice of learning. In Chaiklin, S., & Lave, J. (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 3–34). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lave, J. (1996). Teaching, as learning, in practice. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3, 149–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lave, J. (2008). Situated learning and changing practice. In Amin, A. & Roberts, J. (Eds.), Community, economic creativity, and organization (pp. 283–296). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, V. R., & Sherin, B. (2006, June). Beyond transparency: How students make representations meaningful. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Learning Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN (pp. 397–340).Google Scholar
Lemke, J. L. (1997). Cognition, context, and learning: A social semiotic perspective. In Kirshner, D. & Whitson, J. A. (Eds.), Situated cognition: Social, semiotic and psychological perspectives (pp. 37–55). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Leont'ev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts: Selected papers on group dynamics. New York, NY: Harper.Google Scholar
Lopez, N. (2003). Hopeful girls, troubled boys: Race and gender disparity in urban education. New York, NY: Routledge/Falmer.Google Scholar
Luria, A. R. (1976). Cognitive development: Its cultural and social foundations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
McCracken, W. M., & Newstetter, W. C. (2001). Text to diagram to symbol: Representational transformations in problem-solving. In 31st Annual Frontiers in Education Conference, 2001 (Vol. 2, pp. F2G–13). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.Google Scholar
McDermott, R. (1999). Culture is not an environment of the mind. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(1), 157–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society: From the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Meltzoff, A. N., Kuhl, P. K., Movellan, J., & Sejnowski, T. J. (2009). Foundations for a new science of learning. Science, 325, 284–288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, P. J., & Goodnow, J. J. (1995). Cultural practices: Toward an integration of culture and development. In Goodnow, J. J., Miller, P. J., & Kessel, F. (Eds.), Cultural practices as contexts for development (pp. 5–15). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
National Research Council (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
National Research Council (2005). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (expanded edition). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Nespor, J. (1994). Knowledge in practice: Space, time and curriculum in undergraduate physics and management. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Newell, A. (1989). Putting it all together. In Klahr, D. & Kovosky, K. (Eds.), Complex information processing: The impact of Simon, Herbert A. (pp. 399–440). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Norman, D. A. (1993). Things that make us smart: Defending human attributes in the age of the machine. New York, NY: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
O’Connor, K. (2001). Contextualization and the negotiation of social identities in a geographically distributed situated learning project. Linguistics and Education, 12, 285–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Connor, K. (2003). Communicative practice, cultural production, and situated learning: Constructing and contesting identities of expertise in a heterogeneous learning context. In Wortham, S. & Rymes, B. (Eds.), Linguistic anthropology of education (pp. 63–91). London: Praeger.Google Scholar
O’Connor, K., & Allen, A. (2010). Learning as the organizing of social futures. In Penuel, W. R. & O’Connor, K. (Eds.), Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 108, 1: Learning research as a human science (pp. 160–175).Google Scholar
O’Connor, K., & Glenberg, A. M. (2003). Situated cognition. In Nadel, L. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of cognitive science. London: Nature Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research, 7(4), 557–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paretti, M. C. (2008, October). Teaching communication in capstone design: The role of the instructor in situated learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 491–503.
Pea, R. D. (1985). Beyond amplification: Using computers to reorganize human mental functioning. Educational Psychologist, 20, 167–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pea, R. D. (1993a). Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In Salomon, G. (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 47–87). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pea, R. D. (1993b). Learning scientific concepts through material and social activities: Conversational analysis meets conceptual change. Educational Psychologist, 28(3), 265–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penuel, W. R., & O’Connor, K. (2010). Learning research as a human science: Old wine in new bottles? In Penuel, W. R. & O’Connor, K. (Eds.), National Society for the Study of Education, 108, 1, 268–283.Google Scholar
Perkins, D. N. (1993). Person-plus: A distributed view of thinking and learning. In Salomon, G. (Ed.), Distributed cognitions. Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 88–110). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. Trans. Cook, M.. New York, NY: International Universities Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piaget, J. (1964). Development and learning. In Ripple, R. E. & Rockcastle, V. N. (Eds.), Piaget rediscovered. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1970). Genetic epistemology. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
Piaget, J. (1972). Intellectual evolution from adolescence to adulthood. Human Development, 15(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierrakos, O., Beam, T. K., Constantz, J., Johri, A., & Anderson, R. (2009). On the development of a professional identity: Engineering persisters vs engineering switchers. In Proceedings of 39th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, San Antonio, TX (pp. M4F-1–M4F-6).Google Scholar
Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension. New York, NY: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
Resnick, L. (1987). Learning in school and out. Educational Researcher, 16(9), 13–20.Google Scholar
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rogoff, B. (1995). Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship. In Wertsch, J., del Río, P., & Alvarez, A. (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rogoff, B., & Lave, J. (1984). Everyday cognition: Its development in social context. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Salomon, G. (Ed.). (1992). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, pp. 47–87.
Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. N. (1998). Individual and social aspects of learning. In Pearson, P. D. & Iran-Nejad, A. (Eds.), Review of Research in Education, 23, 1–24.Google Scholar
Sawyer, R. K., & Greeno, J. G. (2009). Situativity and learning. In The Cambridge handbook of situated cognition (pp. 347–367). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schauble, L., Leinhardt, G., & Martin, L. (1997). A framework for organizing a cumulative research agenda in informal learning contexts. Journal of Museum Education, 22(2–3), 3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. How professionals think in action. London: Temple Smith.Google Scholar
Scribner, S. (1997a). Knowledge at work. In Tobach, E., Falmagne, R. J., Parlee, M. B., Martin, L. M. W. & Kapelman, A. S. (Eds.), Mind & social practice: Selected writings of Sylvia Scribner (pp. 308–318). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Scribner, S. (1997b). Studying working intelligence. In Tobach, E., Falmagne, R. J., Parlee, M. B., Martin, L. M. W., & Kapelman, A. S. (Eds.), Mind and social practice: Selected writings of Sylvia Scribner (pp. 338–366). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Scribner, S., & Cole, M. (1973). Cognitive consequences of formal and informal education. Science, 182(4112), 553–559.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sfard, A. (1998, March). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 4–13.
Stevens, R. (2000). Divisions of labor in school and in the workplace: Comparing computer and paper-supported activities across settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4), 373–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, R., O’Connor, K., Garrison, L., Jocuns, A., & Amos, D. (2008). Becoming an engineer: Toward a three dimensional view of engineering learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 97, 355–368.CrossRef
Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and situated action. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. (1992). Multiculturalism and “the politics of recognition.”Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Tonso, K. L. (2006). Teams that work: Campus culture, engineer identity, and social interactions. Journal of Engineering Education, 95, 25–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varenne, H., & McDermott, R. P. (1998). Successful failure: The school America builds. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Vera, A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Situated action: A symbolic interpretation. Cognitive Science, 17, 7–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vosniadou, S. (2007). The cognitive-situative divide and the problem of conceptual change. Educational Psychologist, 42(1), 55–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The collected works by L. S. Vygotsky (6 vols.). New York, NY: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wertsch, J. V. (1993). Voices of the mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Winsor, D. A. (1996). Writing like an engineer: A rhetorical education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Zuboff, S. (1989). In the age of the smart machine: The future of work and power. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×