Beyond competencies: Using a capability model to characterize early career engineering practice

Abstract Background Competency frameworks guiding engineering education often separate technical and social dimensions, obscuring the inherently context‐dependent and sociotechnical nature of engineering practice. This fragmented framing can lead to challenging transitions and identity tensions for graduates entering the profession. In contrast, capability models may offer a more authentic representation of professional performance, enhancing preparedness for practice. Purpose This study examines the suitability of a Capability Learning model for characterizing early‐career engineering practice, highlighting how context and sociotechnical factors shape performance and learning. It also considers insights from capability‐oriented reforms in other professions, like nursing, to inform readiness for practice. Method Inductive qualitative content analysis was used to identify sociotechnical activity patterns from observations and interviews with eight early‐career engineers across four organizations. A deductive narrative analysis of two contrasting cases was performed using a capability model to characterize practice. Results Early‐career engineering practice was characterized by continual shifts in familiarity with problems and contexts. Engineers drew upon combinations of familiarity‐shifting capability processes to navigate unfamiliar situations. These processes fostered self‐efficacy and enabled engineers to extend their abilities to perform existing and newly required competencies and resolve problems. Conclusions A paradigm shift beyond competency frameworks toward a capability model in engineering education and accreditation systems can foster a holistic approach to engineering learning that more authentically reflects the realities of practice. This shift echoes existing agendas within engineering education discourse that support the development of more confident, reflective, and socially attuned engineers prepared to contribute meaningfully in a rapidly changing world.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Engineering Education
Published
2026-11-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.70097
Primary Topic
Engineering Education and Curriculum Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
article

Beyond competencies: Using a capability model to characterize early career engineering practice

Robert E. McHenry, Timothy B. Hilditch, Siva Krishnan
1 links
Journal of Engineering Education
Engineering Education and Curriculum Development
article

Beyond competencies: Using a capability model to characterize early career engineering practice

Robert E. McHenry, Timothy B. Hilditch, Siva Krishnan
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Competency frameworks guiding engineering education often separate technical and social dimensions, obscuring the inherently context‐dependent and sociotechnical nature of engineering practice. This fragmented framing can lead to challenging transitions and identity tensions for graduates entering the profession. In contrast, capability models may offer a more authentic representation of professional performance, enhancing preparedness for practice. Purpose This study examines the suitability of a Capability Learning model for characterizing early‐career engineering practice, highlighting how context and sociotechnical factors shape performance and learning. It also considers insights from capability‐oriented reforms in other professions, like nursing, to inform readiness for practice. Method Inductive qualitative content analysis was used to identify sociotechnical activity patterns from observations and interviews with eight early‐career engineers across four organizations. A deductive narrative analysis of two contrasting cases was performed using a capability model to characterize practice. Results Early‐career engineering practice was characterized by continual shifts in familiarity with problems and contexts. Engineers drew upon combinations of familiarity‐shifting capability processes to navigate unfamiliar situations. These processes fostered self‐efficacy and enabled engineers to extend their abilities to perform existing and newly required competencies and resolve problems. Conclusions A paradigm shift beyond competency frameworks toward a capability model in engineering education and accreditation systems can foster a holistic approach to engineering learning that more authentically reflects the realities of practice. This shift echoes existing agendas within engineering education discourse that support the development of more confident, reflective, and socially attuned engineers prepared to contribute meaningfully in a rapidly changing world.

Journal of Engineering EducationVol. 116(1)
Deakin University (AU)
Deakin University
Quality education
Engineering Education and Curriculum Development
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon