The Value of Difficulty in Engineering Education to Professional Work Experience of Early Career Engineers: A Multiple Case Study

Authors

• Nosakhare Iyobosa Idiaghe, University of Nebraska-LincolnFollow

First Advisor

Jessica Deters

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.)

Committee Members

Grace Panther, Jena Asgapoor, Jennifer Case, Logan Perry

Department

Engineering

Date of this Version

5-4-2026

Document Type

Dissertation

Citation

A dissertation presented to the faculty of the Graduate College at the University of Nebraska in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy

Major: Engineering

Under the supervision of Professor Jessica Deters

Lincoln, Nebraska, May 2026

Comments

Copyright 2026, Nosakhare Iyobosa Idiaghe. Used by permission

Abstract

Engineering education has long been characterized by rigor, intensity, and selective sorting, conditions often justified as necessary for producing capable engineers. Yet, despite the widespread assumption that academic hardship prepares students for professional practice, relatively little empirical work has examined how graduates themselves interpret the value of these difficult experiences once they enter the workforce. This dissertation addresses that gap by investigating how early-career engineers make sense of the difficulty encountered in their undergraduate education and how those experiences compare to the challenges of engineering practice.

Using a qualitative multiple‑case study design, the research draws on semi‑structured interviews with eight early‑career engineers, supplemented by résumés and contextual information from company and university websites. Guided by Schlossberg’s Transition Theory and Godfrey and Parker’s Dimensions of Engineering Culture, the study explores challenges encountered in academic and workplace settings, compares these forms of difficulty, and examines the perceived relevance of academic challenge for professional engineering work.

Findings reveal that undergraduate engineering difficulty is remarkably uniform across institutions, experienced as highly structured, predictable, and culturally reinforced, whereas workplace difficulty is more varied and emerges through ambiguity, organizational pressures, and relational dynamics. The study introduces a conceptual model demonstrating how interpretation shapes whether difficult experiences are viewed as meaningful preparation or unnecessary hardship. It also identifies the types of difficulty early‑career engineers considered genuinely useful, such as those that strengthened their ability to manage competing demands, adapt to uncertainty, and work independently, and those they perceived as offering little relevance to professional practice. This study advances a more nuanced understanding of engineering difficulty and underscores the need to design challenging experiences intentionally, support students as they navigate them, and clearly articulate the purpose such difficulty is meant to serve within engineering education.

Recommended Citation

Idiaghe, Nosakhare Iyobosa, "The Value of Difficulty in Engineering Education to Professional Work Experience of Early Career Engineers: A Multiple Case Study" (2026). Dissertations and Doctoral Documents, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 2023–. 494.
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/dissunl/494