Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:02:10.370Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

DISTRIBUTED COGNITION TRANSFORMATION IN COMPLETE ONLINE SYSTEM ENGINEERING DESIGN TEACHING

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2021

Sabah Farshad*
Affiliation:
Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology (Skoltech)
Clement Fortin
Affiliation:
Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology (Skoltech)
*
Farshad, Sabah, Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Russian Federation, sabah.farshad@skoltech.ru

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Engineering design teams, particularly in academic courses, were no exception to the consequences of the unknown virus and the global pandemic. Forced online teaching has influenced the way of using communication technologies. The information flow architecture of engineering design is also transforming due to the remote activities and the dominancy of web-based technologies. This transformation creates different patterns of distributed cognition within design teams. In the course of full remote teaching, we studied the entire information flow of a small and dispersed engineering team through the early stages of design for one month using the ethnographic method and Distributed Cognition analysis techniques. Our analysis, of the interdisciplinary design team during a rocket engineering project and system engineering teaching, shows the considerable role of different online data sharing and communications technology platforms in distributed cognition and collaborative problem solving within the team. These new trends create new challenges and opportunities, and in order to enhance collaborative design, these emerged out of the box trends require more attention and updating of existing strategies.

Type
Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Andreasson, R., Jansson, A. A. and Lindblom, J. (2019) “The coordination between train traffic controllers and train drivers: a distributed cognition perspective on railway,” Cognition, Technology & Work. Springer, 21(3), pp. 417443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentley, R. et al. (1992) “Ethnographically-informed systems design for air traffic control,” in Proceedings of the 1992 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work, pp. 123129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blandford, A. and Furniss, D. (2005) “DiCoT: a methodology for applying distributed cognition to the design of teamworking systems,” in International workshop on design, specification, and verification of interactive systems. Springer, pp. 2638.Google Scholar
Brereton, M. (2004) “Distributed cognition in engineering design: Negotiating between abstract and material representations,” in Design representation. Springer, pp. 83103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deshpande, A. et al. (2016) “Remote working and collaboration in agile teams.”Google Scholar
Dreyfus, D. (2007) “Information system architecture: Toward a distributed cognition perspective,” ICIS 2007 Proceedings, p. 131.Google Scholar
Durov Nikolai, D. P. (2013) “Telegram.” Dubai. Available at: https://telegram.org/.Google Scholar
Git (2020) Git. Available at: https://git-scm.com/.Google Scholar
Google (2020) Google Docs. Available at: https://www.google.com/docs/.Google Scholar
Greene, M., Papalambros, P. Y. and McGowan, A.-M. (2016) “Position paper: Designing complex systems to support interdisciplinary cognitive work,” in DS 84: Proceedings of the DESIGN 2016 14th International Design Conference, pp. 14871494.Google Scholar
Hine, C. (2000) Virtual ethnography. Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollan, J., Hutchins, E. and Kirsh, D. (2000) “Distributed cognition: toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research,” ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI). ACM New York, NY, USA, 7(2), pp. 174196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchins, E. (1995) Cognition in the Wild. MIT press.Google Scholar
IREC (2020) The Intercollegiate Rocket Engineering Competition, ESRA Spaceport America Cup page. Available at: http://www.soundingrocket.org/what-is-irec.html.Google Scholar
Andrey, Khusid (2020) Miro. Available at: https://miro.com/about/.Google Scholar
Marinova, I. (2020) 28 Need-To-Know Remote Work Statistics Of 2020, Review 42. Available at: https://review42.com/remote-work-statistics/.Google Scholar
Magic, No (1995) “MagicDraw.” Available at: https://www.nomagic.com/products/magicdraw.Google Scholar
Sharp, H. et al. (2006) “The Role of Story Cards and the Wall in XP teams: a distributed cognition perspective,” in AGILE 2006 (AGILE'06). IEEE, pp. 11-pp.Google Scholar
Sharp, H., Giuffrida, R. and Melnik, G. (2012) “Information flow within a dispersed agile team: a distributed cognition perspective,” in International Conference on Agile Software Development. Springer, pp. 6276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zoom Video Communications Inc (2020) “Zoom.” San Jose, California. Available at: https://zoom.us/.Google Scholar