The purpose of this comparative case study, conducted with eight engineers in different firms who specialized in different disciplines of engineering, was to identify and describe the patterned ways in which they used written genres in the context of object-oriented activity, as well as to describe their evaluative frameworks and literacy practices. The research team used descriptive coding to analyze field notes from twelve two-hour observations per engineer; they also used categorical thematic analysis to analyze transcripts from six interviews and retrospective protocols per engineer. The analyses indicated that, to some extent, engineers read and wrote distinct written genres that varied according to their role (e.g., quality assurance manager versus test designer) and the traditions of their discipline (e.g., electrical versus mechanical). However, across sites, roles, and disciplines, they used common evaluative frameworks when they evaluated texts’ accuracy, consistency, adherence to standards, currency, executability, reproducibility, concision, and clarity. In conjunction with these evaluative frameworks, engineers also enacted common literacy practices, such as cross-checking, peer review, using templates when composing, and verifying with the physical world. The study concludes with implications for transformative, rather than reproductive, disciplinary literacy pedagogies in which students can use expansive disciplinary literacies in engineering to address issues that are important to them. As part of these pedagogies, students can articulate why common evaluative frameworks and literacy practices are important to producing safe outcomes in engineering, while they simultaneously expand these frameworks and practices to reflect values and cultures that are important to them.

中文翻译：

---

工程师素养实践的比较案例研究及其对工程教育中变革性学科素养教学法的启示

这个比较案例研究由不同公司的八名工程师进行，他们专门从事不同的工程学科，目的是识别和描述他们在面向对象活动的上下文中使用书面体裁的模式化方式，以及描述他们的评估框架和扫盲实践。研究小组使用描述性编码来分析每位工程师 12 次两小时观察的现场笔记；他们还使用分类主题分析来分析六次采访的成绩单和每位工程师的回顾性协议。分析表明，在某种程度上，工程师阅读和编写不同的书面体裁，这些体裁根据他们的角色（例如，质量保证经理与测试设计师）和他们的学科传统（例如，电气与机械）而有所不同。然而，跨站点、角色和学科，他们在评估文本的准确性、一致性、对标准的遵守、通用性、可执行性、可重复性、简洁性和清晰度时使用了通用的评估框架。结合这些评估框架，工程师还制定了常见的识字实践，例如交叉检查、同行评审、在撰写时使用模板以及与物理世界进行验证。该研究的结论是对变革性而非生殖性的学科素养教学法的影响，在这种教学法中，学生可以在工程中使用广泛的学科素养来解决对他们很重要的问题。作为这些教学法的一部分，学生可以阐明为什么共同的评估框架和识字实践对于在工程中产生安全的结果很重要，