Using genres for laboratory work, report writing and design projects: comparing second and fourth year undergraduate engineers

In 2022, more than 140,000 undergraduates in the USA graduated with an engineering bachelor’s degree (American Society for Engineering Education, 2023). Many of these graduates will join the engineering workforce responsible for designing, building and maintaining critical infrastructure. This includes roads and highways (civil engineers), power generation facilities (mechanical engineers), renewable energy systems (electrical engineers), communication networks (computer engineers), water treatment facilities (chemical engineers) and biomedical imaging instruments (medical engineers). Considering the need for engineering expertise, this paper asks, How do undergraduates learn to recognize, create, use, and apply the information needed to perform these engineering tasks? The paper underscores the significance of document practices in engineering and advocates for increased focus on the role of genres in accomplishing engineering goals.

Drawing on previous work on genre awareness (e.g. Artemeva and Fox, 2010; Devitt, 2004; Ford, 2004; Winsor, 2001), I argue that developing the knowledge of how and when to use information is an important aspect of undergraduate engineers’ transition from novices to emerging professionals. Engineers must be able to interact with specialized information, such as proposals, manuals and reports. At the beginning of their programs of study, undergraduates are newcomers to engineering. As such, their understanding of how to interact with information and perform professional tasks is nascent.

In this study, I analyze the information use of undergraduate engineers at the beginning and end of their programs of study, identifying changes in the genres these students use. I use a genre theory framework because it offers an understanding of how information interaction is situated in socio-cultural orientations toward meaning making and action. Genres are tools for responding to recurring situations within the engineering profession. My approach recognizes the context of information use by exploring how students engage in laboratory work, report writing and design projects. By comparing how undergraduates use information at different stages of their programs of study, this study aims to describe how students’ ways of interacting with information change and develop. The comparative analysis of second and fourth year engineering students undertaken in this research project supplements the existing body of research that has predominantly focused on students in the same year of study, often first year students.

Previous work describes the information behaviors of professional engineers; however, much less attention has been given to understanding the development of document practices among students. This gap in the literature is evident in the context of information use among students transitioning from novices to emerging professionals, and contributes to missed opportunities for supporting undergraduate engineers. Numerous studies have identified low information literacy rates among students, particularly those at the beginning of their programs of study, underscoring the need for further investigation (Denick et al., 2010; Gadd et al., 2010; Wertz et al., 2011; Yu et al., 2006). Additionally, the limited focus on the role of genres in performing engineering tasks – primarily due to the predominant emphasis on writing in technical communication research – necessitates a closer examination of information use. To address these gaps, this study analyzes the information use patterns of students at the beginning and end of their studies.

I addressed the following research questions:

The paper continues with a review of the research literature. This is followed by a description of the methods of data collection and analysis. Findings are then presented, leading to a discussion of implications. The paper concludes by summarizing the contributions of the study and outlining opportunities for future work.

The literature review is divided into two sections. The first section examines the information-seeking behaviors of engineers. This section underscores the need for additional research on how these behaviors evolve as students transition into professionals. The second section describes the relationship between genres and tasks within the engineering profession.

The information-seeking behaviors of engineers have been extensively researched, revealing several themes that underscore their preferences and the contextual factors influencing their information use.

Practical considerations guide engineers’ information seeking and use (Fidel and Green, 2004; Freund, 2015; Leckie et al., 1996). Fidel and Green (2004) studied engineers in a manufacturing company and found that engineers prioritize familiarity, time-saving attributes, physical proximity and format appropriateness in source selection. Engineers’ preference for accessible information is evident, even at the potential cost of decreased authority or focus compared to traditional sources such as books and journal articles. In a study of software engineers in a consulting context, Freund (2015) identified six access constraints influencing the engineers, including awareness, findability, abundance, cooperation dynamics, permissions and time. Several studies have applied Zipf’s principle of least effort to explain engineers’ preference for accessible information, suggesting that their information-seeking behaviors align with the principles of convenience and satisficing (e.g. Allard et al., 2009; Anderson et al., 2001; Tenopir and King, 2004).

Engineers consistently rely on internal sources within their organizations, particularly colleagues (Allard et al., 2009; Anderson et al., 2001; Bruce et al., 2003; Du Preez and Fourie, 2009; Fidel and Green, 2004; Tenopir and King, 2004). Engineers’ preference for oral communication over written documentation stands in contrast to practices observed in scientific fields, where the literature often holds greater significance (cf. Brown, 1999; Gordon et al., 2018, 2022; Hemminger et al., 2007; Jamali and Nicholas, 2008). In their study of aerospace engineers in the private sector, Anderson et al. (2001) found a preference for oral communications. Similarly, Allard et al. (2009) described how design engineers in high-tech firms in the USA and India exhibited a significant reliance on internal sources, particularly colleagues.

While engineers generally favor oral communications, contextual factors can prompt them to turn to traditional written documentation (Anderson et al., 2001; Freund, 2015; Hertzum and Pejtersen, 2000). In a pair of case studies, Hertzum and Pejtersen (2000) describe the information seeking of engineers engaged in product development. The engineers actively sought information from two distinct sources: “informed people” and “informing documents.” Hertzum and Pejtersen found that oral communication and written documentation offer unique perspectives. While design documentation provides technical details, it may lack the broader context of the design process. Colleagues engaged in the work, on the other hand, can offer insights into the rationale and purpose behind specific choices made during the design process. This underscores how integrating both oral and written information is crucial for a comprehensive understanding. Anderson et al. (2001) found that as task uncertainty increases, there is a shift to literature searches and consulting with library personnel, illustrating the dynamic nature of engineers’ dependence on internal networks for information. Overall, the research literature highlights the significance of accessibility, practicality, social dynamics and contextual factors in shaping engineers’ decisions when seeking and using information.

Research has predominately focused on professional engineers rather than students. This presents an opportunity to explore how information use changes as students transition into emerging professionals. Previous studies of undergraduate engineers suggest they exhibit similar information seeking and use as professionals, although with less proficiency (Dodson, 2024; Fosmire, 2014; Kerins et al., 2004; Leckie and Fullerton, 1999; Mercer et al., 2019). Gaps in information literacy skills, particularly in source evaluation and citation practices, have been identified among engineering students (Gadd et al., 2010; Lamont et al., 2020; McAdams and Croxton, 2018; Perez and Hottinger, 2020). Wertz et al. (2011) analyzed 25 first year engineering student-produced memos. Their findings indicate that only three percent of cited sources had complete citations and in-text references. Similarly, Denick et al. (2010) conducted a citation analysis of 29 design reports written by teams of first year engineering students. Their findings revealed students’ preference for Web sources and limited understanding of appropriate use of scholarly journal articles.

Evidence suggests that engineering students’ information literacy skills develop over time (Gadd et al., 2010; Tsai and Janssen, 2018; Yu et al., 2006). Smyser and Bolognese (2022) found that students in a capstone design course demonstrated proficiency in more basic information literacy skills, such as selecting quality sources, choosing a variety of sources, paraphrasing sources and citing sources accurately, but they lacked more advanced skills, such as synthesizing across multiple sources and identifying the extent of information needs – both crucial for justifying design decisions. In one of the few studies comparing lower and upper year students, Yu et al. (2006) examined bibliographies from project reports of second and fourth year chemical engineering students and found that fourth year students cited more items, particularly books and journal articles. A developmental aspect in information-seeking skills is also evident in the engineering design process. Atman et al. (1999) found that fourth year students consistently outperform first year students in the design process, showcasing higher quality designs, comprehensive information gathering and more frequent transitions between design steps. In a follow-up study, Atman et al. (2007) found that professional engineers dedicate more time to problem scoping and information gathering compared to students. The research literature suggests the ways in which undergraduates assimilate the engineering know-what and know-how (Dodson, 2024; Korte et al., 2022), and that students could benefit from increased emphasis on seeking, selecting and using information to enhance their overall approach to the engineering design process.

In response to the identified need for improved information literacy among engineering students, educators, including librarians, have dedicated significant time and resources toward the development of targeted instructional programs (Lamont et al., 2020; Rowley et al., 2020). Some of these initiatives have been explicitly designed to fulfill accreditation requirements (Fosmire, 2020; Seniuk Cicek and Renaud, 2019; Tsai and Janssen, 2021). Collaborations have been formed between engineering departments and libraries or writing centers, with the aim of providing technical communication instruction to engineering students (Putnam et al., 2018; Wetzel and Grove, 2020). However, the assessment of these programs and services has primarily relied on students’ self-reported learning outcomes (Phillips et al., 2018), underscoring the need for additional measures of learning outcomes in future evaluations.

The literature indicates that students’ information literacy develops over time, as evident in shifts in information behavior among first and fourth year undergraduate engineers. This raises a question for future research: How can we record, analyze, and compare the changes in students’ information use as they progress through their academic programs?

The design nature of engineering is reflected in its Latin root, ingeniarius, which means someone who is ingenious in solving problems (Blockley, 2012). Engineers’ tools include not only the oft imagined raw materials and machinery, but also information communicated through more specialized documents, such as journal articles, patents and technical reports. This study draws on rhetorical genre theory to describe how these different types of information, or genres, act as tools in use (Andersen, 2008; Miller, 1984; Orlikowski and Yates, 1994; Spinuzzi, 2003; Yates and Orlikowski, 1992). Thus, a genre theory approach extends beyond the typical understanding of information interaction found in information literacy research by emphasizing the creation, use and appropriate application of various types of information.

Genres are “typified rhetorical actions based in recurrent situations” (Miller, 1984, p. 159) that are “socially recognized types of communicative actions” (Yates and Orlikowski, 2002, p. 14). Genres are recognizable through features of form, content and purpose. Genres can be viewed as actions taken to accomplish tasks, and tasks as information-in-use within a particular setting. For example, a course syllabus serves as a genre, enacting a course by structuring it, reifying shared understanding between student and instructor and establishing a context for task performance. Previous work has offered various framings of how tasks often require using multiple genres. The genres used in a profession have been theorized as ecologies, repertoires, sets and systems (cf. Bazerman, 1994; Devitt, 1991; Orlikowski and Yates, 1994; Spinuzzi, 2004; Yates and Orlikowski, 2002).

Genre theory recognizes the ways in which information use is situated in socio-cultural orientations toward meaning making and action (Artemeva, 2008; Berkenkotter and Huckin, 1994; Russell, 1997). Genres operate within social contexts and communities. In the context of an undergraduate engineering program, the community encompasses norms and practices that are situated in both classroom and professional discourse communities. It can be difficult for novices to learn how to interact with genres and perform tasks that are situated in professional settings (Artemeva, 2008; Freedman et al., 1994; Freedman and Adam, 1996; Poe et al., 2010; Winsor, 2001), and a limited awareness of genres can be a significant barrier to students’ transition from the classroom to the workplace (Artemeva and Fox, 2010; Devitt, 2007).

Recognizing that genres are tools for responding to recurring situations, scholars have combined genre theory with activity theory to describe the ways that genres mediate task performance (Artemeva, 2008; Bazerman, 2004; Russell, 1997; Spinuzzi, 2003). The ability to recognize, use and create situationally appropriate genres is essential for professional socialization within the engineering profession (Berkenkotter and Huckin, 1994; Burkholder, 2010; Freund et al., 2006; Winsor, 2001).

Studies of engineering students’ perceptions have uncovered several misconceptions about the role of writing in their discipline. Emerging engineers exhibit low self-efficacy as writers, a finding corroborated by multiple studies (Li et al., 2019; Wortman-Wunder et al., 2023). Some students even adhere to the stereotype of being “good at math” but “poor at writing.” (Li et al., 2019, p. 14). To reconcile students’ perceptions with reality – i.e. that document practices are integral to engineering – efforts have been made to integrate technical communication instruction throughout the engineering curriculum, including laboratory courses (Horvat and Randi, 2020; Marquez and Garcia, 2020; Mirabolghasemi, 2023). Horvat and Randi (2020) implemented such instruction in two lab-based courses at the junior and senior levels. They found that junior level students reported more difficulty with writing lab reports than senior level students, who had previously completed the technical communication instruction. This was interpreted as evidence of the instruction’s effectiveness. Other studies have examined how expectations for technical communication can be incorporated into syllabi. For example, Yoritomo et al. (2019) found that instructors’ rubrics often overly emphasized strict adherence to textual conventions. They proposed a shift toward best practices from writing studies (e.g. Prior, 1998), including the development of genre awareness to enhance students’ understanding of the conventions of different types of writing within their discipline.

Studies of technical communication in the context of engineering education have focused on writing (i.e. the reproduction, rather than the use of genres) and have overlooked antecedent information use that enables writing. For instance, a student’s lab report documents their engagement with the laboratory. The lab report is based on the student’s use of multiple genres, including studying the lab manual, reading outputs from the experimental tools and possibly referencing journal articles, handbooks or textbooks. I argue that a crucial aspect of information use is overlooked when researchers analyze genres, such as lab reports, without simultaneously considering the activities in which documents are situated. The final lab report, while valuable, is not the only indicator of learning that characterizes the student’s skills and abilities. The student’s understanding of how and when to use genres to complete such tasks should also be appreciated as evidence of their enculturation into engineering practice.

Research has identified the genres used in both educational and professional engineering contexts, providing insights into what types of technical communication instruction might be most beneficial for emerging engineers (Dodson et al., 2024; Jovanovic et al., 2015). Dodson et al. (2024) distinguished between genres that are primarily disciplinary (i.e. related to engineering research and practice, including journal articles, standards and technical reports) and those that are educational (i.e. related to engineering teaching and learning, such as practice exams and instructors’ handouts, notes and slides).

Information use is a central concern in information behavior research. As students learn to use disciplinary genres, they move from novices to professionals. These trends reflect findings in other contexts that information practices develop over time alongside familiarity with a domain of knowledge and the community of which it is composed (e.g. Caidi et al., 2010; Greyson, 2017; Lloyd, 2017; McKenzie, 2003; Willson, 2019).

The first section described the information behaviors of professional engineers, emphasizing their prioritization of accessible channels and interpersonal sources. Despite the wealth of research on professional engineers, a gap exists in understanding how engineering students develop these skills as they transition to emerging professionals. The second section introduced genre theory as the conceptual framework of this study. Genre theory provides an understanding of how genres are socially recognized actions closely intertwined with how tasks are completed.

Through an online questionnaire, I compared how second and fourth year undergraduate engineers use information across three tasks: writing reports, doing labs and doing projects. The following sections describe the study participants, the instrument and the methods of data analysis.

The study was carried out at a large research university in North America. I focused on second and fourth year undergraduate engineers to compare students at the beginning and end of their programs of study. I did not include first year students, because they have not advanced from general studies in physics, chemistry and mathematics to specialized engineering programs. Furthermore, it is unlikely that first year students have developed the types of discipline-specific skills and abilities that are of interest in this study.

I recruited participants through e-mail invitations sent to all undergraduates enrolled in the computer, electrical and mechanical engineering programs through each department’s listserv. According to the American Society for Engineering Education (2023), these engineering disciplines confer the highest number of degrees in the USA. In total, 56 undergraduate engineers completed the study, including 22 second year students and 34 fourth year students.

Through an online questionnaire, I asked respondents to identify the genres that they frequently use when:

• doing labs;

• writing reports; and

• doing projects.

I selected these three tasks because they are common in both educational and professional settings as opposed to activities that are primarily associated with classroom-based learning, such as attending lectures, doing homework and taking exams. In labs, students conduct experiments, gather data and analyze results in a controlled setting. Unlike projects, labs often follow predefined procedures, concentrating on experimental skills and validating theoretical principles. Writing reports centers on documenting and communicating results. Students present findings, interpretations and conclusions coherently, emphasizing the importance of technical communication in engineering. In contrast to labs and projects, report writing emphasizes communication over hands-on applications of engineering and scientific knowledge. Design projects involve applying engineering principles to address real-world issues, often in teams. Projects require creativity, critical thinking and collaboration, emphasizing the application of theoretical knowledge. Unlike labs and reports, design projects are open-ended, fostering innovation and problem-solving skills without predetermined solutions or templates.

The format of the questions was the same for each task. One of the questions, for example, was: “I frequently use __________ when doing labs.” For each question, respondents were instructed to fill in the blank by selecting all appropriate genres from a list of 21 genres (see Table 1). The genre repertoire was created by Dodson et al. (2024), who identified genres prevalent in engineering education through a review of the literature, an analysis of syllabi and course websites and consultations with students and instructors across multiple engineering programs. To evaluate potential genres, Dodson et al. (2024) established inclusion and exclusion criteria based on rhetorical genre theory. Genres were characterized as:

• recognizable by community members, emphasizing that genre creation and use occur within a specific context;

• specific types of documents with a defined communicative purpose;

• not events;

• not information channels or sources (e.g. instructors and libraries are not genres); and

• not software and hardware.

To control for ordering effects, the order of the questions (i.e. the tasks) and the response items (i.e. the genres) were randomized.

I compared responses using a chi-square test to determine whether there is a statistically significant difference in how second and fourth year students use genres across the tasks. To further investigate the association between genre, task and year of study, I conducted a post-hoc analysis through residual analysis and exploratory data analysis.

Residual analysis identifies pairings that significantly impact the chi-square score (Sharpe, 2015). I calculated adjusted standardized residuals for genre–year of study pairings. Larger absolute residuals, whether positive or negative, indicate greater contributions to the overall chi-square score (Agresti, 2019; Delucchi, 1993). Positive residuals indicate attraction between pairings, while negative residuals suggest repulsion. Adjusted standardized residuals greater than or equal to two or less than or equal to negative two are considered meaningful (Agresti, 2019).

The exploratory data analysis involved calculating the relative frequency of genre use for each task by year of study. This value is the proportion of respondents in a group that reported using a specific genre. I used relative frequencies because the groups of second and fourth year students are comprised of unequal number of respondents. For each task, I plotted the relative frequency of use of each genre across task by year of study using bar charts. I also calculated changes in the relative frequency ranks of genres, and visualized the values with bump charts.

My analysis focused on genre–task pairings that changed from second to fourth year of study. The findings and interpretation in the next section are confined to these pairings, with a deliberate choice to refrain from carrying out a comprehensive review of all permutations of the 21 genres and three tasks. The relative frequency of use and rank for each genre–task–year of study triplet is presented in Figures 1–3.

The result of the chi-square test indicates that there is a statistically significant difference in how second and fourth year undergraduate engineers use genres across the tasks (⁠$χ2$ = 34.081, df = 20, p = 0.02558).

Overall, fourth year students use fewer genres than second year students. I observed that the genres that increased in use are genres created for professionals, such as journal articles, patents and technical reports. Across the three tasks, fourth year students reported an increase of 10% or greater in their use of forum posts, journal articles, my cheatsheets, software tutorials, source code and technical reports. The genres that decreased in use are educational genres, created specifically for learners, such as textbooks and instructors’ handouts, notes and slides.

To examine the relationship between genre, task and year of study further, I carried out a post-hoc analysis. The results of which are provided in the following sections, beginning with the residual analysis and then concluding with the exploratory data analysis.

The residuals for each genre–year pairing are displayed in Table 1. There is a positive association between fourth year students and disciplinary genres, including encyclopedia articles, formula sheets, forum posts, my cheatsheets, patents, software tutorials, source code, technical reports and technical standards. Conversely, there is a negative association with educational genres, including handouts, my homework, instructional videos, instructors’ notes and slides, my notes, practice exams and my exams, textbooks and worksheets. However, most residuals did not meet Agresti’s (2019) significance threshold.

One genre associated with fourth year – source code – had an adjusted residual value greater than two, indicating that more fourth year respondents frequently use source code than would be expected by chance. Conversely, two genres associated with fourth year – my exams and practice exams – had adjusted residual values less than or equal to negative, indicating that fewer fourth year respondents frequently use exams than would be expected by chance.

Three genres had values nearing significance. In fourth year, forum posts (1.5) and technical reports (1.4) exhibited a positive association, while worksheets had a negative association (−1.8).

The residuals analysis only examined the association between genre and year of study. To investigate how genre use changed across task and year of study, I carried out an exploratory data analysis.

The frequency of use and rank of each genre for doing labs are displayed in Figure 1. By fourth year, there appears to be an increased emphasis on technology, as evidenced by a 22% rise in source code and a 14% rise in software tutorials. Students also reported a 17% increase in the use of forum posts. Conversely, there is a decline in the use of educational genres, with a 26% decrease in worksheets and a 16% reduction in my homework. My exams also decreased by 14%. The reduction in the use of textbooks (−17%), instructors’ slides (−15%), handouts (−12%) and instructional videos (−10%) further underscores a decreasing reliance on traditional instructional resources for labs.

The frequency of use and rank for writing reports are visualized in Figure 2. There is a 12% rise in the use of technical reports and a 10% increase in journal articles. Conversely, there is a decrease in the reliance on personal notes, marked by a 38% reduction from second to fourth year of study. Furthermore, there is a noticeable move away from instructional videos, as evidenced by a 24% decline. There is also a shift away from traditional assessment types for report writing, with decreased use of practice exams (−10%), my exams (−17%) and my homework (−11%).

The frequency of use and rank for doing projects are visualized in Figure 3. There is an increase in the use of source code (+25%), my cheat sheets (+20%), software tutorials (+11%) and instructional videos. Conversely, there is a 13% decrease in the use of magazine articles. There is also a reduced reliance on instructor’s notes (−20%) and handouts (−25%).

The data analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in how second and fourth year undergraduate engineers interact with information across the tasks, as determined by a chi-square test. Subsequent residual analysis identified both positive and negative associations of specific genres with different years of study. Additionally, exploratory data analysis highlighted fluctuations in how genres are used across the three tasks. The trends indicate that fourth year students report using genres that are more aligned with professional practice than classroom-based learning. The findings offer insights into how genre use differs among students at the beginning and end of their programs of study.

The study explored the information use of second and fourth year students, and provided insights into the research questions. In response to RQ1 (In what ways do second and fourth year undergraduate engineers exhibit changes in their use of genres?), I identified significant differences in how these groups of students interact with different genres. The findings revealed that, overall, fourth year students use fewer genres than second year students and prefer disciplinary genres over classroom-based ones.

Addressing RQ2 (Which specific genres are used by fourth year students that are not used by second year students?), I observed across the three tasks an increase of 10% or greater in forum posts, journal articles, my cheatsheets, software tutorials, source code and technical reports among fourth year students, while all educational genres decreased. Textbooks, for example, decreased by an average of 9% across the three tasks. This trend could be influenced by the specialization that typically occurs toward the end of study programs, potentially resulting in a limited availability of textbooks specific to the topics covered in upper year courses. The 17% increase in the use of forum posts for lab work suggests that fourth year students may be increasingly seeking information from online forums, such as Stack Overflow, for inquiry and problem-solving related to the technologies used in lab procedures and analyses. Furthermore, the increased use of source code and software tutorials for labs and projects indicates a growing integration of technology toward the end of study programs.

In response to RQ3 (In which tasks are differences in information use most apparent between second and fourth year students?), I found changes across all three tasks. The greatest overall change in information use was observed for doing labs (±10%), followed by writing reports (±9%) and doing projects (±8%). This suggests that students’ approaches to interacting with different genres are undergoing meaningful changes across all tasks rather than in specialized areas. Fourth year students appear to place greater emphasis on the use of authoritative sources compared to second year students, aligning with established academic and industry communication standards. This trend is encouraging, as the ability to select and use appropriate genres across information-intensive tasks indicates a level of professional readiness among students.

I argue that the observed changes in students’ information use across writing reports, doing labs and doing projects are an indication of their transition to emerging professionals. Similar to Gadd et al. (2010) and Yu et al. (2006), I observed a shift in the ways that students approaching graduation interact with information, characterized by their tendency to use more disciplinary genres than educational ones. While the internalization of engineering document practices by students could be a possible explanation, other factors may also contribute to this trend. For instance, fourth year students may be using more disciplinary genres due to the requirements stipulated in the assignment descriptions of upper year courses. These alternative explanations warrant further exploration in future studies.

Despite the positive trends, there remains a large proportion of students who do not regularly use disciplinary genres. This study reveals that students at the onset of their academic programs exhibit lower levels of information literacy compared to those nearing graduation, in alignment with the findings of Smyser and Bolognese (2022), Denick et al. (2010) and Wertz et al. (2011). Both groups could use disciplinary genres more frequently. For example, only 40% of second year and 50% of fourth year respondents reported frequently using journal articles – the most popular disciplinary genre – when writing reports. This suggests that all students may benefit from further information literacy instruction, especially training that describes the relationship between genres and tasks.

Such instruction could concentrate on the types of disciplinary genres, including journal articles, patents and technical reports, that emerging professionals will be expected to interact with throughout their careers. Rowley et al. (2020) have similarly advocated for the importance of equipping undergraduate engineers with instruction on standards. Other researchers have proposed that efforts to provide information literacy instruction centered on standards and other disciplinary genres are a crucial step toward meeting accreditation requirements (Fosmire, 2020; Seniuk Cicek and Renaud, 2019; Tsai and Janssen, 2021). Future research could investigate the effectiveness of such instruction.

The absence of a comparative analysis limits my ability to identify any misalignments between students’ information use and the expectations of instructors or the ways professionals use information. To better understand the relative frequency of genre use among undergraduate engineers, establishing a baseline with professional engineers is essential. This would enable comparison between students’ and professionals’ responses.

Using quantitative methods to study information use provides specificity and detail. Describing genres and tasks was important to creating a snapshot of students’ information use toward the beginning and conclusion of their undergraduate studies. Bar charts and bump charts were effective for visualizing differences in information use between the second and fourth year students. It would have been challenging to represent this level of detail with the types of qualitative methods more commonly used to explore information practices, such as interviews and observations. I see potential for applying this method of data analysis to other professional disciplines, such as architecture, the health sciences, law and librarianship.

Additional qualitative studies are necessary to consider the underlying reasons behind the observed trends. While this study has addressed genre awareness by addressing “What?” and “When?” questions, future research could answer “How?” and “Why?” questions. Conducting interviews with students or carrying out observations, for example, could reveal the motivations and challenges influencing their use (and nonuse) of specific genres. Qualitative research can investigate students’ decision-making processes, providing insight into considerations such as the perceived usefulness of adopting certain genres.

This study contributes to understandings of information use, particularly in learning contexts involving engineering students. The theoretical framework focuses on the relationship between genre and task, and how students’ interactions with information change from the beginning to the end of their programs of study. By comparing the frequency and rank of genre use across three tasks, I was able to trace the dynamic relationship between genre and task as a means of exploring undergraduate engineers’ information use.

This study is subject to certain limitations that warrant consideration. The reliance on respondents’ self-reported information use introduces a potential source of bias, as individuals might not always provide an accurate representation of their practices. Furthermore, the study relied on quantitative data analysis techniques. While the data analysis compared what information undergraduate engineers interact with at the beginning and end of their programs of study, future qualitative or mixed-methods research could provide further insights into the underlying reasons for changes in information use over time.

The composition of the sample poses a limitation, as it did not include students from each of the six major areas of engineering (Blockley, 2012), with the absence of undergraduates in civil, chemical and medical engineering programs. This limitation calls for some caution in generalizing findings to programs beyond computer, electrical or mechanical engineering. The study’s limitation to one institution also restricts the external validity of the results to some degree; however, the Washington Accord suggests the findings should be generalizable to other engineering programs. The Washington Accord considers accredited undergraduate and postgraduate engineering programs in Australia, Canada, China, Costa Rica, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Pakistan, Peru, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Turkey, the UK and the USA to be functionally equivalent.

In this study, I focused on comparing second and fourth year students, considering what genres undergraduate engineers use across three common tasks. In future research, there is a need for additional studies to better understand how and why information use changes. While the findings suggest positive developments in students’ capabilities, further work is needed to investigate the challenges faced by students as they progress through their programs of study.

This study provides insights into undergraduate engineers’ information use. I compared how students at the beginning and end of their program of study use different genres for three tasks. Findings show that there are significant differences between how second and fourth year students interact with information. As they progress in their programs of study, students tend to increasingly use disciplinary genres while relying on educational genres less frequently. Findings also indicate that all students might benefit from further information literacy instruction that is tailored to the genres that students will be expected to use in their field of study. This research project lays the groundwork for continued studies of the factors that influence how students become aware of how and when to use specific genres, and the role of this knowledge in their transition to emerging professionals.