Recontextualization of Engineering Epistemology and Rhetoric in Introductory Undergraduate Writing.

Abstract

Many studies on engineering writing are ethnographic in nature and primarily focus on the general perceptions of workplace practice by professionals. This text-based study, in contrast, investigates the way textual resources reflect the disciplinary knowledge and arguments employed by students in their early years of undergraduate education, the most incipient but frequently neglected phase of enculturation into the discipline. Adopting the textual framework of metadiscourse (Hyland, 2005) and APPRAISAL (Martin & White, 2005) to explore reader engagement and writer stance, this investigation seeks to reveal how engineering epistemology and rhetoric are recontextualized in two introductory written assignments: a laboratory report on construction materials in civil engineering and a product usability report in industrial manufacturing and systems engineering. In addition to student writing, assignment prompts, lecture materials, and discourse-based interviews were also examined. Findings suggest that students refocused on four different dimensions of engineering knowledge, and manifested a variety of rational, credibility, and empathetic appeals across sub-disciplines under the influence of various contextual factors including assignment requirements, the nature of technical artefacts, and interaction with team members. This dynamic recontextualization process attests to viewing junior undergraduate writing as a valuable channel to understand the early stage of disciplinary enculturation.