Beyond either/or: Translating configurations of collaboration, belonging, and flexibility into engineering laboratory design

Engineering laboratory pedagogy is often framed through binaries such as collaboration versus autonomy, structure versus flexibility, and co-present versus alternative modes of engagement. This exploratory mixed-methods study asks a different question: how can respondent-level combinations of these preferences be translated into actionable laboratory-design principles? The analysis uses 48 nonduplicate responses from a required end-of-term self-reflection survey administered across four sections of a Spring 2025 Thermodynamics, Fluid Flow, and Heat Transfer Laboratory. Unlike two earlier papers from the same survey, which reported aggregate patterns in spatial-temporal flexibility and collaboration/autonomy, respectively, the present study links selected items within respondents, reports conditional configuration estimates with Wilson 95% confidence intervals, conducts a limited exact-test comparison and original-category sensitivity check, and integrates linked open-ended responses through a mixed-methods joint display. Among 41 students preferring structured, in-person laboratories, 33 (80.5%) expressed at least one strong flexibility indicator. Twenty of 22 students (90.9%) who preferred independent sense-making before peer consultation were also comfortable contributing in groups, and 25 of 44 students (56.8%) who felt heard or valued nevertheless perceived solo-preferring students as disadvantaged. The after-hours contrast was directionally consistent but statistically uncertain. The distinctive contribution is therefore not another set of marginal frequencies, but a respondent-level design translation: preserve the embodied experimental core while deliberately sequencing individual preparation, collaborative execution, bounded temporal flexibility, and multiple routes for contribution. These propositions are exploratory and require prospective testing.