Loading...Loading Video....
CAT 2022 Slot 2 RC 2 (Technical-Social Dualism)
Module 18 of 27
The passage below is accompanied by a set of questions. Choose the best answer to each question.
[CAT 2022 Slot 2]
When we teach engineering problems now, we ask students to come to a single “best” solution defined by technical ideals like low cost, speed to build, and ability to scale. This way of teaching primes students to believe that their decision-making is purely objective, as it is grounded in math and science. This is known as technical-social dualism, the idea that the technical and social dimensions of engineering problems are readily separable and remain distinct throughout the problem-definition and solution process.
Nontechnical parameters such as access to a technology, cultural relevancy or potential harms are deemed political and invalid in this way of learning. But those technical ideals are at their core social and political choices determined by a dominant culture focused on economic growth for the most privileged segments of society. By choosing to downplay public welfare as a critical parameter for engineering design, we risk creating a culture of disengagement from societal concerns amongst engineers that is antithetical to the ethical code of engineering.
In my field of medical devices, ignoring social dimensions has real consequences.... Most FDA-approved drugs are incorrectly dosed for people assigned female at birth, leading to unexpected adverse reactions. This is because they have been inadequately represented in clinical trials.
Beyond physical failings, subjective beliefs treated as facts by those in decision-making roles can encode social inequities. For example, spirometers, routinely used devices that measure lung capacity, still have correction factors that automatically assume smaller lung capacity in Black and Asian individuals. These racially based adjustments are derived from research done by eugenicists who thought these racial differences were biologically determined and who considered nonwhite people as inferior. These machines ignore the influence of social and environmental factors on lung capacity.
Many technologies for systemically marginalized people have not been built because they were not deemed important such as better early diagnostics and treatment for diseases like endometriosis, a disease that afflicts 10 percent of people with uteruses. And we hardly question whether devices are built sustainably, which has led to a crisis of medical waste and health care accounting for 10 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.
Social justice must be made core to the way engineers are trained. Some universities are working on this.... Engineers taught this way will be prepared to think critically about what problems we choose to solve, how we do so responsibly and how we build teams that challenge our ways of thinking.
Individual engineering professors are also working to embed societal needs in their pedagogy. Darshan Karwat at the University of Arizona developed activist engineering to challenge engineers to acknowledge their full moral and social responsibility through practical self-reflection. Khalid Kadir at the University of California, Berkeley, created the popular course Engineering, Environment, and Society that teaches engineers how to engage in place-based knowledge, an understanding of the people, context and history, to design better technical approaches in collaboration with communities. When we design and build with equity and justice in mind, we craft better solutions that respond to the complexities of entrenched systemic problems.
1) All of the following are examples of the negative outcomes of focusing on technical ideals in the medical sphere EXCEPT the:
(1) continuing calibration of medical devices based on past racial biases that have remained unadjusted for changes.
(2) exclusion of non-privileged groups in clinical trials which leads to incorrect drug dosages.
(3) neglect of research and development of medical technologies for the diagnosis and treatment of diseases that typically afflict marginalised communities.
(4) incorrect assignment of people as female at birth which has resulted in faulty drug interventions.
2) We can infer that the author would approve of a more evolved engineering pedagogy that includes all of the following EXCEPT:
(1) moving towards technical-social dualism where social community needs are incorporated in problem-definition and solutions.
(2) making considerations of environmental sustainability intrinsic to the development of technological solutions.
(3) design that is based on the needs of communities using local knowledge and responding to local priorities.
(4) a more responsible approach to technical design and problem-solving than a focus on speed in developing and bringing to scale.
3) The author gives all of the following reasons for why marginalised people are systematically discriminated against in technology-related interventions EXCEPT:
(1) “Beyond physical failings, subjective beliefs treated as facts by those in decision-making roles can encode social inequities.”
(2) “These racially based adjustments are derived from research done by eugenicists who thought these racial differences were biologically determined and who considered nonwhite people as inferior.”
(3) “But those technical ideals are at their core social and political choices determined by a dominant culture focused on economic growth for the most privileged segments of society.”
(4) “And we hardly question whether devices are built sustainably, which has led to a crisis of medical waste and health care accounting for 10 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.”
4) In this passage, the author is making the claim that:
(1) engineering students today are trained to be non-subjective in their reasoning as this best enables them to develop much-needed universal solutions.
(2) technical-social dualism has emerged as a technique for engineering students to incorporate social considerations into their technical problem-solving processes.
(3) the objective of best solutions in engineering has shifted the focus of pedagogy from humanism and social obligations to technological perfection.
(4) engineering students today are taught to focus on objective technical outcomes, independent of the social dimensions of their work.
[CAT 2022 Slot 2]
When we teach engineering problems now, we ask students to come to a single “best” solution defined by technical ideals like low cost, speed to build, and ability to scale. This way of teaching primes students to believe that their decision-making is purely objective, as it is grounded in math and science. This is known as technical-social dualism, the idea that the technical and social dimensions of engineering problems are readily separable and remain distinct throughout the problem-definition and solution process.
Nontechnical parameters such as access to a technology, cultural relevancy or potential harms are deemed political and invalid in this way of learning. But those technical ideals are at their core social and political choices determined by a dominant culture focused on economic growth for the most privileged segments of society. By choosing to downplay public welfare as a critical parameter for engineering design, we risk creating a culture of disengagement from societal concerns amongst engineers that is antithetical to the ethical code of engineering.
In my field of medical devices, ignoring social dimensions has real consequences.... Most FDA-approved drugs are incorrectly dosed for people assigned female at birth, leading to unexpected adverse reactions. This is because they have been inadequately represented in clinical trials.
Beyond physical failings, subjective beliefs treated as facts by those in decision-making roles can encode social inequities. For example, spirometers, routinely used devices that measure lung capacity, still have correction factors that automatically assume smaller lung capacity in Black and Asian individuals. These racially based adjustments are derived from research done by eugenicists who thought these racial differences were biologically determined and who considered nonwhite people as inferior. These machines ignore the influence of social and environmental factors on lung capacity.
Many technologies for systemically marginalized people have not been built because they were not deemed important such as better early diagnostics and treatment for diseases like endometriosis, a disease that afflicts 10 percent of people with uteruses. And we hardly question whether devices are built sustainably, which has led to a crisis of medical waste and health care accounting for 10 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.
Social justice must be made core to the way engineers are trained. Some universities are working on this.... Engineers taught this way will be prepared to think critically about what problems we choose to solve, how we do so responsibly and how we build teams that challenge our ways of thinking.
Individual engineering professors are also working to embed societal needs in their pedagogy. Darshan Karwat at the University of Arizona developed activist engineering to challenge engineers to acknowledge their full moral and social responsibility through practical self-reflection. Khalid Kadir at the University of California, Berkeley, created the popular course Engineering, Environment, and Society that teaches engineers how to engage in place-based knowledge, an understanding of the people, context and history, to design better technical approaches in collaboration with communities. When we design and build with equity and justice in mind, we craft better solutions that respond to the complexities of entrenched systemic problems.
1) All of the following are examples of the negative outcomes of focusing on technical ideals in the medical sphere EXCEPT the:
(1) continuing calibration of medical devices based on past racial biases that have remained unadjusted for changes.
(2) exclusion of non-privileged groups in clinical trials which leads to incorrect drug dosages.
(3) neglect of research and development of medical technologies for the diagnosis and treatment of diseases that typically afflict marginalised communities.
(4) incorrect assignment of people as female at birth which has resulted in faulty drug interventions.
2) We can infer that the author would approve of a more evolved engineering pedagogy that includes all of the following EXCEPT:
(1) moving towards technical-social dualism where social community needs are incorporated in problem-definition and solutions.
(2) making considerations of environmental sustainability intrinsic to the development of technological solutions.
(3) design that is based on the needs of communities using local knowledge and responding to local priorities.
(4) a more responsible approach to technical design and problem-solving than a focus on speed in developing and bringing to scale.
3) The author gives all of the following reasons for why marginalised people are systematically discriminated against in technology-related interventions EXCEPT:
(1) “Beyond physical failings, subjective beliefs treated as facts by those in decision-making roles can encode social inequities.”
(2) “These racially based adjustments are derived from research done by eugenicists who thought these racial differences were biologically determined and who considered nonwhite people as inferior.”
(3) “But those technical ideals are at their core social and political choices determined by a dominant culture focused on economic growth for the most privileged segments of society.”
(4) “And we hardly question whether devices are built sustainably, which has led to a crisis of medical waste and health care accounting for 10 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.”
4) In this passage, the author is making the claim that:
(1) engineering students today are trained to be non-subjective in their reasoning as this best enables them to develop much-needed universal solutions.
(2) technical-social dualism has emerged as a technique for engineering students to incorporate social considerations into their technical problem-solving processes.
(3) the objective of best solutions in engineering has shifted the focus of pedagogy from humanism and social obligations to technological perfection.
(4) engineering students today are taught to focus on objective technical outcomes, independent of the social dimensions of their work.