Conference Session

Engineering Ethics Division (ETHICS) Technical Session _Monday June 26, 11:00 - 12:30

Collection

2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jeff R. Brown, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University - Daytona Beach; Chad Rohrbacher, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University - Daytona Beach; Taylor Joy Mitchell, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University ; Leroy Long III, Sinclair Community College - Dayton; Jenna Korentsides, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University - Daytona Beach; Joseph Roland Keebler, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University - Daytona Beach

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Ethics Division (ETHICS)

] reported results from a quasi-experimental study that evaluated embedded ethics modules in a computer science course. Thisintervention included discussion, perspective-taking activities and stakeholder analysis aroundthe ethics of contact tracing in a public health context. These researchers reported an increase instudents’ level of interest and perceived self-efficacy in addressing ethical issues. Our inventionalso seeks to increase interest and perception regarding ethical issues, and using a similar quasi-experimental methodology, we can review the implications of our intervention on students’perceptions of ethical and professional responsibility. Furthermore, Hess et al. [ 27] usedqualitative methods to investigate empathetic perspective

Conference Session

Engineering Ethics Division (ETHICS) Technical Session _Monday June 26, 11:00 - 12:30

Collection

2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Alice Fox, Stanford; Benjamin C. Beiter, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Ethics Division (ETHICS)

insistence from engineering and engineering ethics thatfailure is a necessary component of a ‘good’ engineering process and embracing failure isparamount to success in engineering [31], [32], [33], [34], engineering course and programdesign rarely integrate this value. Instead, 40% and 50% student failure rates in engineeringare often explained as not meant to be, unready for rigorous education, or poor work ethic[35], [36]. However, Brandi Geisinger and Raj Raman’s work on understanding attrition ratesidentify ”classroom and academic climate,” “grades and conceptual understanding,” and “self-efficacy and self-confidence” as the three leading reasons students report leaving engineeringdisciplines ([36] p.914). Of these issues, recent investigations