Making sociotechnical doable: Cross‐disciplinary translations into engineering education

Background Engineering education research (EER) increasingly invokes the “sociotechnical,” yet the term travels across science and technology studies (STS), engineering studies, and EER in uneven ways. As EER faces shifting political and institutional pressures, understanding how concepts migrate across disciplinary boundaries offers insight into how research problems are constructed, legitimized, and made actionable. Purpose This paper examines how the concept of the “sociotechnical” has traveled from science and technology studies (STS) and engineering studies into engineering education research (EER), and how it has been translated into “doable problems” that help shape EER. Method We conducted a three‐part, mixed‐methods study: (1) a citation analysis in Scopus to identify highly cited sociotechnical‐focused engineering education works; (2) a genealogical analysis to trace theoretical and epistemic lineages; and (3) a conventional content analysis of citing articles to examine how sociotechnical is used, transformed, and operationalized across the field. Results Three highly cited works—Cech & Sherick (2015), Leydens & Lucena (2017), and Trevelyan (2019)—construct different orientations toward sociotechnical: critique of engineering culture, justice‐oriented curricular formation, and workplace‐centered sociotechnical competencies. Citing literature translates these framings into doable problems such as inclusion, justice, and workforce preparation. Across contexts, sociotechnical becomes increasingly narrowed into measurable skills or curricular modules. Conclusions Sociotechnical functions as a boundary object whose flexibility enables cross‐disciplinary translation but also risks flattening critical, historical, and political dimensions. We argue for treating sociotechnical as an open site of negotiation—one that sustains reflexive, critical engagement rather than reducing complexity to assessable competencies.