Crossing Disciplinary Boundaries – Deconstructing Gendered Practices in Engineering Education

  • Anne-Françoise Gilbert


This paper aims to provide a theoretical basis for the argument that interdisciplinary education may be a way to improve the gender balance in engineering. For that purpose, it focuses on gendered and gendering practices in engineering education as a key to understand the underrepresentation of women. Opting for a social studies of science approach, mechanisms of disciplinary reproduction in engineering are examined. First, historical processes of institutionalization of engineering disciplines in the late 19th century are addressed and their gendered dimension skeched out. Then, using a piece of comparative ethnographic fieldwork at a university of technology in Switzerland, educational practices in two engineering disciplines are contrasted, namely mechanical engineering and materials science. Drawing on Bernstein’s typology of educational codes, the link between educational practices, disciplinary identities and the (re)production of gendered identities is explored in these two fields. Finally, this analysis provides the basis for a critical assessment of different types of interdisciplinarity in the context of engineering education and their respective potential for degendering engineering curricula.


Mechanical Engineering Engineering Education Educational Practice Engineering Discipline Disciplinary Boundary 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Belhoste, Bruno (1995): L’élitisme polytechnicien: excellence scolaire et distinction sociale. In: Bel- hoste, B., A. Dahan Dalmedico, D. Pestre & A. Picon (Eds.), La France des X. Deux siècles d’histoire. 19–32.Google Scholar
  2. Berner B. Explaining Exclusion: Women and Swedish Engineering Education from the 1890s to the 1920s. History and Technology. 1997;14:7–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernstein, Basil (1975): On the classification and framing of educational knowledge. In: Bernstein,B., Class, Codes and Control. Volume 3: Towards a Theory of Educational Transmissions. London, Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 85–115.Google Scholar
  4. Bourdieu P. Le champ scientifique. Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales. 1976;2(3):88–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Braun, Hans-Joachim (1980): Professionalisierungsprozess, sozialökonomische Interessen und ’Standesfragen’: Zur Sozialgeschichte des Ingenieurs 1850-1914. In: Schmidtchen, V. & E. Jäger (Eds.), Wirtschaft, Technik und Geschichte. Festschrift fur Albrecht Timm. 317–332.Google Scholar
  6. Connell RW. Gender and Power. Cambridge: Polity; 1987.Google Scholar
  7. van Gennep A. [1909]): Les rites de passage. Paris: Picard; 1981.Google Scholar
  8. Gieryn TF. Boundaries of Science. In: Jasanoff S, Markle GE, Petersen JC, Pinch T, editors. Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: SAGE; 1995. p. 393–443.Google Scholar
  9. Gilbert A-F. Disciplinary cultures in mechanical engineering and materials science: gendered/gendering practices? Equal Opportunities International. 2009;28(1):24–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gilbert A-F. Academic Careers in Engineering Science: Gender Effects of Recent Developments. In: Godfroy-Genin A-S, editor. Women in Engineering and Technology Research. Berlin: Lit Verlag; 2010. p. 149–167.Google Scholar
  11. Gilbert, Anne-Françoise (2011): Deconstructing the Gendered Subtext in Engineering Education: A Comparative Ethnographic Approach. forthcoming. Google Scholar
  12. Grelon A, Stück H, editors. Ingenieure in Frankreich, 1747–1990. Campus: Frankfurt/M; 1994.Google Scholar
  13. Klein JT. A Conceptual Vocabulary of Interdisciplinary Science. In: Weingart P, Stehr N, editors. Practising Interdisciplinarity. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; 2000. p. 3–24.Google Scholar
  14. Klein JT. A taxonomy of interdisciplinarity. In: Frodeman R, Klein JT, Mitcham C, editors. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010. p. 15–30.Google Scholar
  15. König W. Spezialisierung und Bildungsanspruch. Zur Geschichte der Technischen Hochschulen. Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte. 1988;11:219–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nye MJ. From chemical philosophy to theoretical chemistry: Dynamics of matter and dynamics of disciplines, 1800–1950. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1993.Google Scholar
  17. Paulitz, Tanja (2007): Kämpfe um hegemoniale Männlichkeiten in der Ingenieurkultur um 1900. In: Brunotte, U. & R. Herrn (Eds.), Männlichkeiten und Moderne. Geschlecht in den Wissenskulturen um 1900. Bielefeld: transcript.Google Scholar
  18. Snyder BR. The Hidden Curriculum. New York: Knopf; 1971.Google Scholar
  19. Weingart P. A short history of knowledge formations. In: Frodeman R, Klein JT, Mitcham C, editors. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010. p. 3–14.Google Scholar
  20. Zachmann, Karin (2004): Mobilisierung der Frauen. Technik, Geschlecht und Kalter Krieg in der DDR. Frankfurt/M: Campus.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anne-Françoise Gilbert
    • 1
  1. 1.University of BernSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations