Geetanjali R. Date

‘Solving for Pattern: an operational-level model of engineering education for sustainability’ My doctoral research work focused on developing an operational-level model to redesign engineering education for sustainability. Based on the premise that the human adaptive practice of building, whose modern form is engineering, is now damaging the planet, we need to critically change our current approach to engineering and design, towards sustainability. However, it is not clear how to move to such a sustainable engineering model. A promising approach to develop an operational- level model of sustainability engineering is the systematic study of successful cases that demonstrate sustainability. I thus undertook a study of innovators working at the grassroots, who generate sustainable technology designs 'in the wild', and developed an empirically-driven characterization of sustainable technology design practice and design cognition. This work led to two core design principles (Plasticity of the Socio-Technical Connection, Technology to sustain local livelihoods). These were then brought together to develop a wider design perspective, termed Solving for Pattern, inspired by Wendell Berry's discussion on this topic. The educational and design intervention directions based on these principles are applicable widely to technology design practice and engineering education.


Refereed Journal Papers

1. Date, G., & Chandrasekharan, S. (2017). Beyond Efficiency: Engineering for Sustainability Requires Solving for Pattern. Engineering Studies, 1-26. DOI:10.1080/19378629.2017.1410160

2. Date, G., Dutta, D., & Chandrasekharan, S. (In press). Solving for pattern: a model of technology beyond efficiency. Journal of Environmental Values.

Refereed conference Proceedings

1. Date, G., Agrawal, H., & Chandrasekharan, S. (2018). Probing 'design thinking' through simulation tasks: A novel tool to elicit thinking strategies and principles in grassroots engineering design. Proceedings of epiSTEME 7: International Conference to Review Research on Science, Technology and Mathematics Education. Mumbai: Cinnamonteal.

2. Date, G. R., & Chandrasekharan, S. (2016). The Socio-Technical Connection is Plastic, but Only When Design Starts from Need Formulation. Proceedings of the 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans, Louisiana. 10.18260/p.27019.

3. Chandrasekharan, S., Date, G., Pande, P., Rahaman, J., Shaikh, R., Srivastava, A., Srivastava, N., Agrawal, H. (2015). Eye to I: Males Recognize Own Eye Movements, Females Inhibit Recognition. Proceedings of the 37th Annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Pasadena, USA.

4. Date, G., Chandrasekharan. S. (2014). Beyond interfaces: Understanding the process of designing grassroots technologies, to develop sustainability case studies for engineering education. Proceedings of the 6th IEEE International Conference on Technology for Education, Kerala, India.

Thesis advisor: