Cultivando Engineering Skills: Uncovering the Funds of Knowledge Among Engineering Students and Professionals with Migratory Backgrounds

Recruitment and Participants

We recruited thirteen participants, seven undergraduates and six engineering professionals, to participate in a series of interviews. Both the undergraduate and professional participants were recruited from the CAMP program at their respective institutions. The CAMP staff member shared our study invitations with current students and with former students who remained connected to the program. Before the interview, participants completed a screening survey to confirm that they had a migratory farmworking background, were enrolled as engineering students, or had graduated with an engineering degree. CAMP’s federal eligibility criteria served as our operational definition that guided our participant recruitment and selection.

Our participants’ migratory experiences varied in context and duration. For example, one participant’s family continues to engage in active seasonal migration between Florida and Michigan for agricultural work. The remaining participants came from families that previously migrated for agricultural labor during their childhoods but now maintain more stationary agricultural employment. Six of the participants were agricultural workers in their youth or while in college, while the others grew up in migratory farmworking households without engaging in agricultural labor themselves.

Our sample had five women and eight men, all self-identifying as first-generation, of Mexican descent, and were low-income before starting college. Low-income status was self-reported by participants and verified through their participation in the CAMP program, whose eligibility criteria require demonstrated financial need (U.S. Department of Education, 2022b). Ten of our participants grew up in rural areas, eight different engineering disciplines are represented, and the sample participants were from seven universities across the US. The professional engineers have worked in industry for less than two years, except for Sebastian, who has over 20 years of industry experience. The undergraduate students were in their second, third, or fourth year of college. Table 1 provides a summary of our participants with pseudonyms to ensure confidentiality.

Data collection

Two semi-structured interviews were conducted in the Fall of 2022 and 2023 via Zoom. The interview protocols (see supplemental document) were collaboratively developed by the research team through iterative discussions grounded in the funds of knowledge framework. The first author conducted all interviews to foster rapport and connect with the participants via shared lived experiences. Each interview lasted one hour. The first interview focused on exploring the knowledge and experiences our participants developed from their migratory families, experiences working on household projects, family practices, and the responsibilities they had growing up. The questions during this interview centered on five thematic areas (i.e., pathways to engineering, personal background information, personal histories, cultural experiences, social networks, and work-related experiences). After asking questions about their experiences while growing up, we asked our participants to reflect on how, if at all, those experiences were connected to their engineering studies and professional work.

After the first round of interviews, we recognized that one hour was insufficient for participants to deeply reflect on their lived experiences and their connection to engineering. This second interview protocol also focused on four thematic areas to build on and refine themes from the first interview (i.e., personal background information directed towards engineering interest, family/household experiences, engineering epistemology, and personal epistemology). Taking this approach allowed us to gain a deeper understanding of their lived experiences and whether, and how, they saw connections to engineering.

Data analysis

The audio recordings were professionally transcribed using Rev.com. To ensure the accuracy of participants’ responses, the first author verified that the audio recordings matched the transcribed text. NVivo 14 software was used to help code the data.

In Vivo coding was used to code the data inductively in the first phase, allowing participants’ narratives to drive the emergence of codes and honor their voices (Saldaña, 2021). During In Vivo coding, participants’ own words were used to generate initial codes that captured recurring experiences shared during the interview. In the second coding cycle, pattern coding was applied to group the In Vivo codes into subcodes. The subcodes were created by identifying patterns across related In Vivo codes and across multiple participants. These subcodes represented distinct patterns within the broader conceptual categories that would ultimately form the final themes. Following pattern coding, axial coding was used to move the analysis from subcodes and parent codes to final themes. Axial coding allowed us to identify relationships among the subcodes, making connections and organizing them into parent codes and ultimately final themes (Saldaña, 2021). For example, the In Vivo code “remodeling a teared down house” was organized into the subcode “House Projects,” then grouped under the parent code “Practical Skills,” and ultimately formed the final theme “Resourcefulness.” Table 2 provides an overview of our codebook, including the final themes, code levels (parent and subcodes), code names, descriptions, and representative quotes from participant interviews.

Trustworthiness

Efforts were made to ensure trustworthiness in this study, utilizing the strategies outlined by Lincoln and Guba (1985). Both authors have experience working with individuals from migratory farmworking backgrounds, and the first author’s lived experiences mirror those of the participants’ experiences. The research was approached with an understanding of the potential bias given the proximity to the participants; these shared experiences served as instruments for evaluating the data and enhancing the credibility of the findings. The first author documented his reflections and decision-making in memos on the analysis and interpretation of the data, creating an audit trail to ensure dependability. The memos contributed to confirmability by ensuring the participants’ voices and experiences shaped the findings rather than our bias. The codes and data interpretation were validated through multiple discussions, review of excerpts, and agreement among the research team. The process of reaching agreement within the team and member checking were important parts of developing credibility (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Transferability was sought by including thick descriptions of participants’ characteristics and context, enabling others to assess the applicability of our findings to other contexts. By reflecting on our experiences and potential biases, we engaged in reflexivity, an important part of maintaining trustworthiness. These combined efforts contributed to the overall trustworthiness of the study.

Positionality

Author 1: As a first-generation, low-income, Latino, straight male from a Mexican farmworking family, my research interests center on understanding migratory individuals’ motivation and persistence in engineering, from adolescence through undergraduate studies and into professional practice. My lived experiences provide valuable insight into this population’s navigational challenges and strengths through a cultural lens that allowed me to recognize the nuances that might otherwise be overlooked. I recognize that my positionality shapes both what I see and what I might miss. While my identities facilitate rapport and understanding, they can also create blind spots. My experiences are singular and cannot represent the full diversity within migrant communities. I reflect on these limitations throughout the research process, from design through interpretation, engaging in ongoing reflexivity to mitigate bias and ensure participants’ authentic voices remain central to the findings.

Author 2: I am a faculty member in an engineering program at a Hispanic-Serving Institution and identify as a Latina raised by Mexican parents. My research focuses on addressing issues of access and persistence for minoritized students. I have been working with students associated with CAMP for several years to help address the disparity in access to quality engineering experiences. I believe that issues of access or persistence cannot be addressed without creating a learning environment that is responsive to students’ accumulated bodies of knowledge from home and knowledge gained through their own experiences as working adults. I believe that students enter engineering with diverse funds of knowledge, and that learning about those bodies of knowledge requires intentional conversations with students and alumni. Throughout the data analysis process, I continuously reflected on the participants’ experiences with care to ensure that I was bringing their unique sociocultural context into the analysis. For example, I repeatedly revisited their full interview transcript to contextualize the coded data segments within their broader story.

Empathetic habits of mind

Across both undergraduate students and professional engineers, an empathetic habit of mind was an important fund of knowledge rooted in witnessing and participating in acts of care within their families. Whether by observing parents’ compassionate interactions with others, supporting migrating family members, or working alongside their parents, participants developed an empathetic orientation that shaped their approach to engineering work and interpersonal relationships. Nayeli (Computer Science student) stated, “… just being empathetic to other people … are definitely a lot of skills that I kind of gained when I was young …” She credits the development of this skill to her exposure while working closely with her parents, who work at a plant nursery. Nayeli recalls learning to be more empathetic by observing her mom and applying it in her own practice, explaining:

She continued by stating that seeing her mom care for the plants in the nursery and being empathetic toward others around her are lessons she has applied throughout her academic career. Later in the interview, Nayeli added, “having that empathy, I think. I’m still in my studies and stuff, but I’m finding ways that I can mentor others. And once I get into the industry, I want to continue that more especially not only because I’m a woman in engineering, but I’m also a Latina.” Nayeli mirrors the empathy her mom showed toward her plants by showing empathy towards women like her who will one day decide to pursue an engineering degree.

Other students, like Antonio, shared that his empathetic disposition of “being kind, helping people out when they’re in need” was transmitted by his parents. He recalls witnessing his parents’ empathy and generosity firsthand when they offered their home to family members migrating from California: “when they [my uncles who lived in California] made the transition to come to live in Washington, my parents offered up their house for them to stay in… Before they found a place to live.” This act of care toward migrating family members shows the fund of knowledge that shaped Antonio’s empathetic orientation. Antonio also shared his experience supporting his parents in the fields, starting from the age of seven until he went to college. These experiences cultivated a desire to help others, which influenced his decision to pursue bioengineering. “I’m going into bioengineering because I want to help people, especially people who work in the field[s], they’re exposed to constant chemicals, constant strains on their bones and stuff.” This empathetic foundation developed at home extended to his academic work, as he stated, “I would say when I would help people, I help them on calc and physics …” By mentoring peers, Antonio drew upon the same funds of knowledge (i.e., collaborative and caregiving embedded in his migratory family) that grounded an empathetic habit. Collectively, these experiences have reinforced Antonio’s empathetic mindset as a compassionate bioengineer.

The empathetic habits of mind among undergraduate engineering students were also evident among the professional engineers interviewed. Ana, Olivia, and Edgar expressed how empathy was practiced at home, emphasizing how their parents consistently demonstrated empathy toward others. Olivia and Ana spoke about how they learned to be empathetic through their mother’s practices. Specifically, Ana shared,

Providing shelter and care to a stranger in need reflected the empathetic habits of mind embedded in Ana’s family culture.

All three engineers discussed how they applied empathy at their respective jobs when interacting with technicians. Ana’s statement is illustrative of why this practice was important in her job:

Edgar, similar to Ana, shared that while other engineers overlook technicians, he empathizes with them because he likes to listen to their perspective, “They give out good solutions sometimes … and they make sense like they’re not engineers, but they know better because they’re in the field.” Edgar further explained that being open to the technicians’ input has supported his engineering work in exploring more solutions. The empathetic habits of mind of these professionals appear to enhance their problem-solving skills by enabling them to see and understand problems from multiple perspectives, an important skill set for engineers. While both students and professionals developed empathetic habits through similar familial contexts, such as caregiving and compassion, their application differed. The undergraduate students leveraged empathy to navigate their coursework and peer relationships, and these empathetic habits benefited their academic performance by reinforcing their understanding of the coursework while helping others. They also recognized that empathetic habits could positively impact their future career by fostering a caring approach to their work and the people around them. In contrast, the professional engineers were already integrating empathy into their workplace practices, particularly through interactions with technicians and other non-engineering staff. Among the professional engineers, empathy became a mechanism for inclusive problem-solving and accessing diverse knowledge sources, ultimately enhancing the quality of their work.

Teamwork

Migratory families’ financial strain results in additional responsibilities for our participants that are atypical for many children and young adolescents from privileged backgrounds. Half of our participants recalled working in the fields alongside their parents and learning to collaborate with other farmworkers. This early experience of collaborating to achieve a common goal provided a foundation that both students and professionals later drew upon to navigate engineering. Maribel (Computer Science student) shared her experience working alongside her parents in the fields:

To further show what this collaborative work entailed, Maribel described another agricultural work experience in a bodega (i.e., packing facility), where the interdependency of tasks became clearer:

Maribel’s experience coordinating tasks with coworkers, in which each person’s contribution was essential to the collective outcome, directly shaped how she approached teamwork during her internship. As she reflected:

Similarly, Sebastian (Professional Engineer) shared how his stepdad took him out of school for a month and a half during the olive season because it was financially necessary to make ends meet. He added:

Sebastian explained that many of the tasks in the fields were a team effort, and it was better for everyone to work together because they were paid based on the amount of work performed. For instance, he shared: “[it was a] team effort. I remember packing grapes…we could make more bonuses if we made more or got incentivized.” Sebastian has been a professional civil engineer for over 20 years; his upbringing and experiences in a low-income, migratory farmworking household motivated him to start his own successful construction company, where he manages multiple engineering teams and staff.

The experiences in agricultural settings provided both students and professionals with an intuitive understanding of interdependence and collective achievement. Their experiences working in the fields helped develop their ability to work in teams, a skill they have been applying in engineering. By working or collaborating with others in agricultural settings, our participants came to understand the importance of each team member’s role in achieving a goal, a skill particularly relevant within a field like engineering, which involves cross-disciplinary collaboration. What distinguishes students from professionals in this regard is the scale and complexity of team contexts. Students primarily applied teamwork in academic projects and internships, where team structures were often temporary and educationally focused. On the other hand, professionals like Sebastian leveraged these same foundational skills to lead entire engineering teams and manage large-scale construction operations.

Organizational Skills

Organizational skills emerged across participants as a direct response to managing multiple responsibilities within their resource-constrained household environments. The need to coordinate tasks, track information, and maintain order amid their parents’ demanding work schedules cultivated habits that they could apply in academic and professional engineering contexts. Many participants discussed taking on multiple responsibilities to contribute to the family’s functioning and well-being as their parents juggled demanding work schedules. Through these unique lived experiences, engineering students and professionals with migratory backgrounds develop strong organizational skills. For example, Agustin (Engineering student) shared that helping around the house with chores and keeping everything neat helped him become more organized in school, saying, “keeping my notes organized, so that way it’s easier to find them, so I’m not struggling to find my notes and information that I need to complete an assignment or something.” Later in the interview, he emphasized the importance of keeping his math and physics formulas organized so that they would be easier to refer back to if he ran into problems or needed to make changes.

Nayeli (Computer Science student) developed her organizational skills by helping her parents take inventory in their plant nursery. She further described how this experience helped her navigate coursework:

She added how these experiences have helped her in her studies, “Especially with engineering, my coding project. I kind of think a lot more about how I’m going to organize my thoughts. Like, if I need to do this, what do I need to do to complete it?”

The organizational skills shared by the undergraduate engineering students were also reflected by the professional engineers’ stories. Edgar, a Professional Engineer, shared how his mother’s example played a critical role in fostering and sustaining his organizational skills, stating:

Ana, a Professional Engineer, also credits her organization and abilities to manage many tasks simultaneously to her experiences growing up. She further explained that now at her work, these experiences help her build good organizational skills, saying:

Ana further elaborated on how her organizational skills were developed in response to her parents’ demanding work schedules, “[I had to] keep track of like grades, and watched my sisters, or like just kind of time managing and figuring out what like my priorities were.” Similarly, Olivia (Professional Engineer) recalled how her family saw things that needed to be done in the form of a list, further developing her organizational habits, saying “… one thing about me and my family is like we kind of see everything as a list every single day and I think that’s why we’re so like we need to get it done. We need to get it done.” Now Olivia works developing memory and storage solutions at a microchip company, and the experiences with her family help her day-to-day job, “… we have a group of queues [of things to get done], once you’re done with it you write the reporting, release it, or whatever you can cross it off your list.” Both Ana and Olivia credited their organizational skills as factors that led to promotions. Specifically, Ana explained that she received a promotion after her first year, noting, “Which is kind of difficult for a lot of new hires, especially at a leading aerospace manufacturer company, and just being organized … definitely helped me with that.”

Whether assisting with household chores or helping their parents in other capacities, engineering students and professionals with migratory backgrounds were exposed to unique challenges and responsibilities that shaped how they developed their organizational skills. The impact of these participants’ funds of knowledge, as they relate to organizational skills, supported their navigation of engineering differently. For the undergraduate students, this skill set supported their academic trajectory by helping them manage coursework, structure class projects, and track formulas for problem-solving. Among the professional engineers, their organizational skills served as a strategic asset that directly influenced their career advancement. More significant is how the development and practice of this skill helped participants like Ana secure promotion after only a year in a competitive industry. The organizational skills among the professional engineers extended beyond personal task management to the coordination of complex projects, managing workflows, and meeting industry demands, skills that were recognized and rewarded through promotions and increased responsibilities.

Work Ethic

Work ethic, which encompasses a set of moral principles, values, ethical responsibilities, and a person’s determination to pursue goals and the drive to complete tasks, represented a deeply ingrained fund of knowledge that participants connected explicitly to their cultural backgrounds and family values. This fund of knowledge revealed how the moral principles and determination developed through supporting migratory families shaped participants’ approach to engineering work. Students like Camilo and Maribel articulated how their work ethic helped them manage the demanding workload of engineering programs and stand out in internships. Camilo (Engineering student) shared:

Much of this learning happened while helping his stepdad maintain and repair the family’s vehicles, fixing suspension issues, changing oil, replacing radiators, and addressing whatever problems arose. These tasks required precision, responsibility, and doing the job well, reinforcing the strong work ethic he later carried into engineering. Camilo further explained, “work ethic is being able to just work hard and put in the work … I mean, everybody in engineering works hard, no doubt … But I think those that maybe don’t have as many responsibilities [haven’t developed the same work ethic as myself].” For Maribel (Computer Science student), work ethic was instilled in her from a young age while working in the fields with her parents or conversing with them:

The professional engineers we interviewed also shared how migratory families have instilled this work ethic of getting things done and on time. For instance, Olivia stated:

Both Olivia and Edgar recognized how their parents had an attitude of doing chores and projects around the house properly and never leaving them incomplete. They also shared that they saw other people in their workplace with similar cultural backgrounds display a strong dedication to their work by staying longer at work to get things done right. Edgar expressed:

Similarly, Sebastian expressed how his experiences working in the fields built a strong work ethic by stating:

Edgar and Sebastian’s experience highlights how a strong work ethic was ingrained in their upbringing and culture, which drove their commitment to completing tasks right and with dedication.

The experiences of working to support their families, whether in the fields or through household responsibilities, influenced how both undergraduate students and engineering professionals approached work-related tasks. Students like Camilo and Maribel articulated how their work ethic helped them manage the demanding workload of engineering programs and stand out in internships. While the professional engineers connected work ethic to long-term career commitment and success. Work ethic among professionals went beyond individual achievement, reflecting an internalized value that sustained them throughout their careers and shaped their approach to professional challenges. This framing of work ethic, as an internalized value, was less prominent among the undergraduate students we interviewed, suggesting that the connection between personal values and work ethic may deepen with professional experience and workplace observations over time.

Translational Skills

Many participants described experiences serving as translators for their parents, primarily by translating official documents from English to Spanish, including legal documents from government or medical offices. This experience of translating between different settings and languages (i.e., common or daily Spanish vocabulary and medical/government terminology) enhanced their ability to communicate information to different people and contexts, including non-technical audiences. The experience of navigating between languages and contexts cultivated communication competencies that were valuable to participants who needed to translate between technical and non-technical audiences.

Nayeli (Computer Science student) recalls how, at a young age, she supported her family’s business by being a translator:

Nayeli’s experience helped her develop her communication skills by facilitating conversations between clients, vendors, and her parents at the plant nursery. Similarly, Maribel recalls having to advocate for her parents by developing and applying translational skills, “growing up, I had to advocate for my parents a lot. Whether that be translating or just expressing their ideas to somebody who probably didn’t understand.” Maribel also shared that these experiences helped her navigate her engineering program, stating:

Similar to the undergraduate students, the professional engineers also shared how their parents relied on their translational skills. Mariano (Professional Engineer) spoke about how he often facilitated communication and technical translation by scheduling appointments or by translating conversations with his parents into a more casual language they would understand. He shared:

By translating conversations between government officials and medical professionals for his parents, Mariano developed the ability to communicate effectively across languages and in different settings. Similarly, Olivia (Professional Engineer) shared her experience in developing her translational skills. She explained:

Olivia later added how these experiences have been helpful in navigating her engineering job, “I’ve been the main person to communicate with vendors…I’m [also] able to actually communicate effectively, which I’ve seen a lot of people not being able to do.” Edgar (Professional Engineer) also cultivated his communication skills from home, specifically from his mom, and stated that now that he works in industry, he understands how big of a skill it is.

Our participants’ experiences highlight how their unique backgrounds contribute to the development of their translational skills and, in turn, enhance their ability to navigate engineering. These translational skills empowered students and engineering professionals to communicate effectively across multiple contexts. Students mainly leveraged translational skills for self-advocacy purposes, such as communicating with teaching assistants, asking for help, and navigating educational systems. For professional engineers, translational skills served as a unique competency that set them apart from colleagues who lacked cross-cultural communication experiences and which extended to external stakeholder communication, particularly with vendors and cross-functional teams, where the ability to bridge technical and non-technical language proved essential for project success. Throughout the interviews, the professionals also spoke about how their translational skills were a unique competency that set them apart from colleagues who lacked cross-cultural communication experiences.

Resourcefulness

Resourcefulness emerged as a creative problem-solving orientation developed in response to material constraints and scarcity. Participants’ experiences of getting by with limited resources (e.g., remodeling homes on tight budgets, adapting to supply shortages, or learning unconventional repair methods) cultivated an adaptive mindset that aligned closely with engineering design thinking. Our participants recounted how their home experiences engendered the ability to be resourceful in the midst of scarcity. Bruno, a Mechanical Engineering student, described how being resourceful served him in his daily life, particularly when working on home maintenance projects. During the interview, he shared,

Bruno’s experience assisting his father with household repairs gave him valuable technical knowledge that later helped him in his engineering classes, including his capstone project. As such, Bruno shared, “[with my hands-on experience] I was able to learn just how to apply a different solution to [our engineering problem], and eventually we came up with a really good solution [for] our client.”

Similarly, Luisa, an engineering student, developed the skillset of being resourceful through her experiences while growing up, she stated:

Luisa also described how helping her mom with the food truck further developed her ability to think resourcefully:

Luisa expressed how both experiences mirrored engineering-related problems, stating:

Connecting her lived experiences to her engineering class gave Luisa first-hand experience of how being resourceful amidst scarcity was actually a creative way to solve engineering problems.

In a similar way, Olivia (Professional Engineer) shared how she learned how to change the car’s oil filter using an unconventional method. Her ability to be resourceful by exploring alternative approaches to solving this problem has helped her be more creative and adaptive at her job:

Similarly, Ana (Professional Engineer) recalled growing up in a resourceful household, where financial limitations meant that buying used items and seeking out free food and school supplies were a normal part of her daily life. She shared:

Later, Ana described how growing up with limited resources, such as transportation, food, and school supplies, taught her to be resourceful, which has served her well at work. She added:

Being resourceful for both students and professionals meant generating creative solutions, thinking outside the box in their engineering classes, and supporting their performance and ability to carry out engineering tasks. The key distinction between students and professionals lies in how they apply their resourcefulness. Students like Bruno and Luisa were making explicit connections between their home experiences and engineering coursework. They were still developing the capacity to name and frame their experiences as engineering-relevant knowledge. In contrast, professional engineers like Olivia and Ana had fully integrated resourcefulness into their professions and career strategies. For them, resourcefulness was not just about solving immediate technical problems but about differentiating themselves in competitive workplaces and “climbing the corporate ladder” through creative thinking. The engineering professionals demonstrated more understanding of how resourcefulness could be leveraged strategically for career development, whereas students were still in the process of recognizing and validating their resourcefulness as actual engineering knowledge.

Funds of Knowledge as Ways of Doing Engineering

The ways our participants mobilized their funds of knowledge to navigate engineering raise important questions about dominant assumptions about what counts as legitimate engineering competencies. The engineering discipline has traditionally prioritized technical expertise as a marker of legitimacy, shaping how engineering work is evaluated and how professional identities are formed (Downey & Lucena, 2004; Leydens & Lucena, 2018). Technical competency is often prioritized and seen as a more legitimate way of being and doing engineering work, while interpersonal skills are often seen as secondary or as outside the bounds of ‘real’ engineering work. Faulkner (2007) illustrates this tension; in her work, she demonstrates that engineering professionals were less likely to see themselves as ‘real engineers’ when their daily work tasks required more interpersonal skills and less technical knowledge. At the same time, the ABET (formerly known as the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology) continues to emphasize the importance of non-technical skills, such as teamwork, communication, ethics, and professional responsibility, that are necessary for engineering graduates to tackle complex societal issues (ABET, 2024; National Academy of Engineering, 2024). Engineers collaborate in teams, communicate ideas to different people, manage multiple tasks, and address engineering problems ethically, making skills such as communication, organizational skills, teamwork, and work ethic essential (ABET, 2024; Passow, 2012; Walther et al., 2020; Zaharim et al., 2010).

Our participants’ shared experiences show how their interpersonal skills, cultivated through everyday home and labor practices, served as a source of knowledge integral to how they learned, practiced, and enacted legitimate forms of engineering work. For example, translational skills, which can be thought of as a form of communication, were framed as a legitimate engineering competency and emphasized as important in daily engineering activities and interactions with clients and customers. Engineering is an extremely oral culture where communication skills in the form of translating across diverse contexts, ensuring clarity, negotiating, and listening are essential (Darling & Dannels, 2003). Translational skills, for our participants, functioned as a boundary-spanning engineering practice that allowed them to translate technical knowledge across contexts.

Empathetic habits of mind, as an interpersonal skill that focuses on deep engagement and valuing differences, are particularly valuable, given that engineering education and practice have been characterized by historical and cultural norms of exclusion that can hinder inclusion and equitable teaming (Rodríguez-Simmonds et al., 2023). Empathy is important for engineers as it helps them navigate problems related to working and interacting with different people (Rasoal et al., 2012; Sheppard et al., 2004). Empathy can play a crucial role in shaping students’ professional development as engineers through their relationships with others, their approaches to learning, and their understanding of empathy itself (Walther et al., 2020). Across participants, empathetic habits of mind shaped their engineering practice, influencing their interactions, reactions to situations, and cultural sensitivity.

The experiences of laboring alongside their parents in the fields and collaborating with other farmworkers fostered teamwork abilities. Engineering projects are inherently collaborative and require the expertise of multiple individuals; therefore, teamwork is critical for engineering graduates to understand their roles within a team and learn to excel as team players (Passow, 2012; Zaharim et al., 2010). Our participants’ early foundation in coordinating multiple competencies to accomplish shared goals proved crucial as they later engaged in engineering work. It supported participants in navigating engineering contexts in which coordinating efforts across diverse disciplinary expertise was essential to solving complex problems.

Organizational skills emerged as a fund of knowledge developed through participants’ early household responsibilities. Organizational skills enable engineers to coordinate complex projects, manage workflows, and meet industry demands, which are essential competencies for career advancement and professional success (ABET, 2024). Our participants described learning to prioritize tasks and track information as they supported their parents’ demanding work schedules. Their experiences cultivated organizational skills that transferred directly into academic and professional engineering contexts. Nayeli demonstrated this connection, crediting her work managing inventory spreadsheets for her parents’ plant nursery with shaping her approach to organizing engineering projects and coding work. Recognizing organizational skills from migratory individuals positions them as equipped contributors to engineering practice.

Work ethic represented another critical fund of knowledge cultivated through participants’ work alongside their families. For many participants, work ethic was linked to witnessing their parents’ commitment to completing tasks well and on time despite obstacles or resource constraints. ABET standards and the National Academy of Engineers have emphasized professional responsibility and ethical commitment as central to engineering practice, particularly as engineers tackle complex problems in society (ABET, 2024; National Academy of Engineering, 2024). Camilo shared how his stepdad’s demonstration of working quickly and working well had taught him a work ethic he “always value[s] up until this day,” a quality he credited with making him “one of the favorites” in his engineering roles due to the depth of his commitment relative to his peers. Sebastian similarly traced his willingness to work long hours and to apply practical, detail-oriented approaches in his engineering designs to his experiences with physical labor in the fields. Our participants’ narratives show that work ethic extends beyond compliance with professional standards; it reflects an internalized commitment to excellence cultivated through their families and lived experiences.

Across a variety of disciplines, the ability to be resourceful has been associated with creativity (Jackson & Shaw, 2006; Maestri & Wakkary, 2011; Walsh et al., 2013). In engineering specifically, engineering design is defined as an iterative, creative, decision-making process that requires producing solutions within constraints, such as budget, resources, and time (ABET, 2024). Resourcefulness contributes to social innovation and increases confidence in innovation, enabling the effective use of tools and other resources (Ulug & Horlings, 2019). For our participants, their resourcefulness fund of knowledge functioned as a way to creatively problem- solve under real-world constraints, highlighting that working creatively with limited materials and options was a central feature of how they approached and carried out engineering work.

Funds of Knowledge as Capital in Engineering Contexts

Our participants’ funds of knowledge served as capital that enabled them to gain credibility and legitimate participation in engineering contexts. These findings align with scholars’ call not only to recognize students’ funds of knowledge but also to understand their transmission and conversion into capital that can produce advantages (Marquez Kiyama & Rios-Aguilar, 2017; Rios-Aguilar et al., 2011). We are not advocating for collapsing funds of knowledge into forms of capital, a caution we share with Marquez Kiyama and Rios-Aguilar’s (2017) work. Collapsing the two would assume that home knowledge automatically confers an advantage, obscuring the conversion process by which funds of knowledge become capital only when institutional contexts recognize and value them. Instead, we draw on a capital perspective to examine the conditions under which funds of knowledge can be converted into valuable resources or capital within engineering. Our findings help extend this theoretical proposition by demonstrating how funds of knowledge served as currency, enabling students and professionals to navigate their engineering practices. The ways in which our participants developed empathetic habits of mind, teamwork, organizational skills, translational skills, work ethic, and resourcefulness were not inherently valued as capital that could be leveraged in their engineering context. That is, these funds of knowledge, developed and transmitted through migratory family practices and labor, were converted into capital when participants leveraged them to support the completion of engineering-related competencies.

Our undergraduate participants mobilized their funds of knowledge to help them navigate coursework, peer collaborations, competing academic and family responsibilities, or, in Maribel’s case, self-advocacy. Their funds of knowledge functioned as emerging forms of capital that supported their learning and persistence, even when they were not explicitly recognized as engineering-relevant knowledge. Among the professionals we interviewed, converting their funds of knowledge into capital helped create interpersonal trust among colleagues, access to diverse knowledge sources such as technicians’ expertise, leadership opportunities, and, in Ana and Sebastian’s case, career advancement. Both the student and the professionals mobilized their home and experiential knowledge and skills to effectively collaborate, solve problems amid constraints, and manage complex responsibilities, all of which are central practices of an engineer. Collectively, our findings support the claim that funds of knowledge function as valuable forms of capital, enriching participants’ capacity to navigate engineering and raising awareness of ways that minoritized students’ home knowledge can be leveraged to teach engineering.

Scholars argue that capital is not an inherent part of funds of knowledge but can be an outcome when mobilized (Marquez Kiyama & Rios-Aguilar, 2017; Rios-Aguilar et al., 2011). Our participants’ funds of knowledge became capital when their value depended on institutional recognition and alignment between dominant ways of doing engineering and their lived experiences. More specifically, the translational and empathetic funds of knowledge became capital when they facilitated communication across technical and non-technical boundaries or facilitated problem-solving efforts. Organizational skills and work ethic were converted to capital when they enabled our participants to manage complex projects, meet deadlines, and engender a sense of reliability. These two examples emphasize that students’ and professionals’ funds of knowledge do not function as capital on their own; their ability to be recognized as capital depends on institutional recognition and alignment. By empirically documenting the processes by which funds of knowledge can be transmitted, converted, and mobilized across engineering contexts, we expand the possibilities for using students’ home knowledge and practices to teach engineering. Our work also draws attention to the responsibility of engineering educators and institutions to create conditions in which migratory students’ funds of knowledge can move from mere recognition to being meaningfully valued and leveraged as legitimate capital in practice.